2023 Trek Domane+

Thanks Stefan,
Marvelous! I got used to the way the first generation (X35) works and I never thought of something so reasonable
It is a mid-drive motor with both cadence and torque sensors, so the system can calculate and multiply the cyclist's power.
Technically speaking, the motor of this kind has rider's power-meter-pedals.
 
I took the Domane out for another spin today to get a better feel for assist and battery consumption. I started out by setting it at 25% assist with max set at 72W which is close to Creo 15/30. What I realized is that the Trek software already factors in the 2X ( 2 times you) calculation and assist levels are graded from 0-200% although the floor is 25%. So Creo 15% may equal Domane 30%. At this level of assist battery consumption appeared to be about 1% every 2 miles (200 miles range) as opposed to a range of 250 miles for the Creo. At times I couldn't detect much in the way of added power and it became apparent that the lack of the Creo whine and smooth acceleration made the assist almost imperceptible.

I thought that this may have been slightly below the Creo's level of assist. I then dialed the assist up to 30% with max remaining at 72W. Consumption /range would have been about 135 miles and then did a little test.
There is a small quarter mile ramp near my house that I often like to hammer.
Last week I PR'd it in the Creo at 15/30 in 47 seconds.
With the Domane at 30/72W, I again PR'd it in 44 seconds. So I could probably dial this back to 25% and approximate my Creo ECO settings.
Summary:
With somewhat comparable settings, Creo appears to have slightly better range but Domane appears more than adequate for my usage without the need to add an extender.

Also, same unreliable results with power. On the hammer:
Average / max power Creo - 392/480
Domane - 235/315 My max HR was exactly the same!
 
I took the Domane out for another spin today to get a better feel for assist and battery consumption. I started out by setting it at 25% assist with max set at 72W which is close to Creo 15/30. What I realized is that the Trek software already factors in the 2X ( 2 times you) calculation and assist levels are graded from 0-200% although the floor is 25%. So Creo 15% may equal Domane 30%. At this level of assist battery consumption appeared to be about 1% every 2 miles (200 miles range) as opposed to a range of 250 miles for the Creo. At times I couldn't detect much in the way of added power and it became apparent that the lack of the Creo whine and smooth acceleration made the assist almost imperceptible.

I thought that this may have been slightly below the Creo's level of assist. I then dialed the assist up to 30% with max remaining at 72W. Consumption /range would have been about 135 miles and then did a little test.
There is a small quarter mile ramp near my house that I often like to hammer.
Last week I PR'd it in the Creo at 15/30 in 47 seconds.
With the Domane at 30/72W, I again PR'd it in 44 seconds. So I could probably dial this back to 25% and approximate my Creo ECO settings.
Summary:
With somewhat comparable settings, Creo appears to have slightly better range but Domane appears more than adequate for my usage without the need to add an extender.

Also, same unreliable results with power. On the hammer:
Average / max power Creo - 392/480
Domane - 235/315 My max HR was exactly the same!

Pardon, but your post sparked my curiosity.
You use so little assistance that I wonder (coming from the other end of the assist spectrum) what led you to e-bikes in the first place.
I also wonder where you get the projected range estimates from. Have you tested the Creo to the point of batter exhaustion (over separate rides)? I find it surprising that the 25% larger capacity TQ battery would yield only 80% as many miles over the same terrain at the same speed. It suggests that the TQ system is horribly inefficient. The only metric I find reliable is the % battery remaining, which the Domane+ reports in 1% decrements. (However, I haven't yet confirmed that the burn rate for the last 25% is as good as the first 25%.)
With regard to power, do the values you cite consist of your input alone? How reported on the Domane+?
Thanks for your prior and future feedback.
 
I don't know the (reported) efficiency of the Creo system, but in the case of TQ the manufacturer reports 90%.
How can we understand a 20% less projected distance in TQ for a configuration similar to Creo (also considering that TQ has higher battery capacity)?
 
Pardon, but your post sparked my curiosity.
You use so little assistance that I wonder (coming from the other end of the assist spectrum) what led you to e-bikes in the first place.
I also wonder where you get the projected range estimates from. Have you tested the Creo to the point of batter exhaustion (over separate rides)? I find it surprising that the 25% larger capacity TQ battery would yield only 80% as many miles over the same terrain at the same speed. It suggests that the TQ system is horribly inefficient. The only metric I find reliable is the % battery remaining, which the Domane+ reports in 1% decrements. (However, I haven't yet confirmed that the burn rate for the last 25% is as good as the first 25%.)
With regard to power, do the values you cite consist of your input alone? How reported on the Domane+?
Thanks for your prior and future feedback.
Getting older and I like having bonk insurance. My motor usage isn't linear but that seemed to be the easiest metric to compare. I ride in groups and if age appropriate I usually ride in the flats with no assist and use ECO on gentle climbs to neutralize the weight. When in faster groups, I'll use ECO in the flats and SPORT (30/50) on steeper climbs. I no longer have climbing dread. Real life usage isn't linear as I clearly need more assist at the end of longer rides. I can't compare battery consumption between the 2 bikes at higher assist levels.
 
I have a new Domane+ SLR 6 myself, base model, purchased at the end of April. I was interested in the TQ technology, and wanted some assistance on super hot days or when the winds kick up on my return leg. I am 68 and live in Tucson, an active road cyclist logging 75-100 miles a week normally. I have 3 other road/gravel bikes and wanted a performance e-road bike. A narrow Q-factor was important due to my medial meniscus issues. I have pretty bad knees from years of trail running and imperfect biomechanics, but up until a couple of weeks ago was doing fine, and still averaging 15-16mph (solo) on two hour rides.

So.. I injured one of my knees about two weeks ago and then made it worse by continuing to ride and some stupidity on my part with my gravel bike. The torque to the knee was the final insult and the situation is bad again. Doc said the knees are bone on bone, with severe arthritis. I'm not ready for a joint replacement, but I have to keep pedaling, as it has always kept me going. Thank god for this bike. It may buy me a few more years before something has to be done with the joints.

Yesterday, after not riding for almost a week, I needed to pedal - so I took the Domane+ out, set the boost to the highest setting and managed to ride 13 miles before I started to feel some pain and quit. I could only put in a very low effort, but still managed to average 15 mph. It provides just enough when you need it, and only used 24% of the battery (~ 52 mi range). Yet it feels quite natural and my legs aren't splayed out like on a couple other bikes I tried before I bought this one. My knees actually felt a lot better after the ride and icing down the bad one.

I am really shocked at how good this bike is. Quiet, exceptionally smooth and natural feeling. Feels almost like my Roubaix, but with that extra boost. Surprised to see I was averaging similar speed, with much less effort, yet quite frugal with the battery it seems. Worth every penny if you were in my situation.
 
Last edited:
I took the Domane out for another spin today to get a better feel for assist and battery consumption. I started out by setting it at 25% assist with max set at 72W which is close to Creo 15/30. What I realized is that the Trek software already factors in the 2X ( 2 times you) calculation and assist levels are graded from 0-200% although the floor is 25%. So Creo 15% may equal Domane 30%….

actually, specialized does the same. the first % is the % of total assist ratio, which is 2x on the SL bikes. so 100% = 200% assist. put in 100w, motor adds 200w for a total of 300w. 50% = 100% assist. put in 100, motor adds 100w.

it’s weirdly counterintuitive but it allows the “system” to be the same on bikes of varying power. very interesting to me that trek/tq are doing the same.

has anyone here compared dual sided power pedals to the built in meter? is the big variance confirmed or just suspected? the specialized SL system is also off by a bit depending on the situation, although it’s gotten better.
 
has anyone here compared dual sided power pedals to the built in meter? is the big variance confirmed or just suspected? the specialized SL system is also off by a bit depending on the situation, although it’s gotten better.
Have never used power pedals, but I find it rather interesting that despite the watts being all over the place during my rides (both rider and system watts), when I return from a ride and look at the average watts displayed in the Trek Dashboard ride summary - the sum of the two figures (rider/system) is within a few watts of what Strava tells me was expended for the ride. Yesterday it was within ONE watt. Two completely different systems and ways of deriving the number. Strava uses the actual route with known elev gain, time, heart rate (for effort) and rider weight, to get to it's number. I don't think it knows much about localized wind conditions. Obviously the bike measures what the bike and I are actually putting in.

For them to be so close tells me the Trek number must be fairly accurate. There has only been one exception - on my first ride, Strava was low by 15 watts - but I had a very strong headwind without a compensating tailwind, and I also had not told Strava it was an e-bike ride.

The speed and range continue to impress, being at least as good as Trek estimates, but tuning through the app is still a crapshoot and I am never really sure why I get exactly what I do in the various modes, other than of course MAX contributes more than ECO or MID. Still figuring it out.
 
Have never used power pedals, but I find it rather interesting that despite the watts being all over the place during my rides (both rider and system watts), when I return from a ride and look at the average watts displayed in the Trek Dashboard ride summary - the sum of the two figures (rider/system) is within a few watts of what Strava tells me was expended for the ride. Yesterday it was within ONE watt. Two completely different systems and ways of deriving the number. Strava uses the actual route with known elev gain, time, heart rate (for effort) and rider weight, to get to it's number. I don't think it knows much about localized wind conditions. Obviously the bike measures what the bike and I are actually putting in.

For them to be so close tells me the Trek number must be fairly accurate. There has only been one exception - on my first ride, Strava was low by 15 watts - but I had a very strong headwind without a compensating tailwind, and I also had not told Strava it was an e-bike ride.

The speed and range continue to impress, being at least as good as Trek estimates, but tuning through the app is still a crapshoot and I am never really sure why I get exactly what I do in the various modes, other than of course MAX contributes more than ECO or MID. Still figuring it out.
Assuming you have the bike or bike "power meter" paired with your bike computer, Strava averages the actual broadcast wattage from the bike. You can easily see it if you examine the analysis graph. With an actual power meter, there are thousands of data points and high variability. So the wattage between Trek dashboard and Strava should be nearly identical. Strava only uses the virtual estimates if there is no power meter. If you look at the power graph on a ride without a power meter, the graph has far fewer data points and is significantly smoothed.
 
specialized does the same. the first % is the % of total assist ratio, which is 2x on the SL bikes. so 100% = 200% assist. put in 100w, motor adds 200w for a total of 300w.
I had been assuming that "up to 4x you" meant the total (me + bike) was 4x, meaning the assist was actually 3x. Which would make the SL "2x" up to 50/50 rider/bike.

Do we know for sure of the 2x/4x number includes the rider or not?
 
Have never used power pedals, but I find it rather interesting that despite the watts being all over the place during my rides (both rider and system watts), when I return from a ride and look at the average watts displayed in the Trek Dashboard ride summary - the sum of the two figures (rider/system) is within a few watts of what Strava tells me was expended for the ride. Yesterday it was within ONE watt. Two completely different systems and ways of deriving the number. Strava uses the actual route with known elev gain, time, heart rate (for effort) and rider weight, to get to it's number. I don't think it knows much about localized wind conditions. Obviously the bike measures what the bike and I are actually putting in.

For them to be so close tells me the Trek number must be fairly accurate. There has only been one exception - on my first ride, Strava was low by 15 watts - but I had a very strong headwind without a compensating tailwind, and I also had not told Strava it was an e-bike ride.

The speed and range continue to impress, being at least as good as Trek estimates, but tuning through the app is still a crapshoot and I am never really sure why I get exactly what I do in the various modes, other than of course MAX contributes more than ECO or MID. Still figuring it out.
hello mtnroads
Thank you for your feedback, in fact the optimal adjustment of the assistance levels is a task that can be complicated if we do it by trial and error without following any methodology.
I've been cycling all my life, but I'm a little old now and also a cancer survivor.
Despite using an 8Kg BMC Roadmachine bicycle, I decided to incorporate an Ebike to be able to keep up with the young people that make up my cycling group.
For many years I have used pedals with power meters on both sides and I know very well what my FTP is.
When I bought my Orbe Gain D50 ebike I developed a methodology to optimally customize the assistance levels, that methodology is a very good approximation.
I have ordered a Domane+ SLR6 that I expect to receive in a couple of months, and my plan is to adapt and verify the methodology with Domane+ SLR.
Meanwhile I continue to feed on all the experiences that are reported in this forum and all the information available about Domane+ SRL.
 
I had been assuming that "up to 4x you" meant the total (me + bike) was 4x, meaning the assist was actually 3x. Which would make the SL "2x" up to 50/50 rider/bike.

Do we know for sure of the 2x/4x number includes the rider or not?

we know for sure, it does not include the rider.

if you put down 100, at 100% of 2x it'll put down 200. specialized has explained it and many of us have tested it with power meters, mission control, etc.
 
Assuming you have the bike or bike "power meter" paired with your bike computer, Strava averages the actual broadcast wattage from the bike. You can easily see it if you examine the analysis graph. With an actual power meter, there are thousands of data points and high variability. So the wattage between Trek dashboard and Strava should be nearly identical. Strava only uses the virtual estimates if there is no power meter. If you look at the power graph on a ride without a power meter, the graph has far fewer data points and is significantly smoothed.
Nothing is linked, Strava doesnt talk to any of my bikes, nor my Elemnt Roam, which I use as a simple bke computer. Everything is standalone, which is why I found the close numbers interesting, and supportive of the argument that the Trek is fairly accurate.
 
we know for sure, it does not include the rider.

if you put down 100, at 100% of 2x it'll put down 200. specialized has explained it and many of us have tested it with power meters, mission control, etc.
2x is for the electrical power delivered, or a marketing figure. It is 1.8x mechanically, so pedalling at 100 W provides 180 W of mechanical motor assistance. I know you know it @mschwett :)

The matter "up to 4x" is rather fuzzy. Some full power Specialized motors provide 3.2x assistance, some come up with 3.6x (mechanical). I believe the strongest new motors might approach 3.8x mechanical assistance. Anyway, providing the leg power of 100 W at 100/100% SL Turbo provides 100 + 180 = 280 W of mechanical power to the chainring, and there is no disagreement on that.
 
Antonio, I can't wait to hear how you like the Domane SLR. And if your tuning methodology unlocks any secrets :)

I forgot to mention earlier that one thing I really like about the new Domane+ SLR is it uses standard road bike wheels 12x100 and 12x142. I have an extra set of Roval carbon rims with 38mm Gravelking slicks that I bought for my Spec Diverge that should fit right on. And the 12 speed Di2 is compatible with 11 speed wheels. So they will work. The previous Domane+ LT with Fazua used a much less common 12x148 Boost wheel in the rear, and they were pricey.
 
hello mtnroads
Thank you for your feedback, in fact the optimal adjustment of the assistance levels is a task that can be complicated if we do it by trial and error without following any methodology.
I've been cycling all my life, but I'm a little old now and also a cancer survivor.
Despite using an 8Kg BMC Roadmachine bicycle, I decided to incorporate an Ebike to be able to keep up with the young people that make up my cycling group.
For many years I have used pedals with power meters on both sides and I know very well what my FTP is.
When I bought my Orbe Gain D50 ebike I developed a methodology to optimally customize the assistance levels, that methodology is a very good approximation.
I have ordered a Domane+ SLR6 that I expect to receive in a couple of months, and my plan is to adapt and verify the methodology with Domane+ SLR.
Meanwhile I continue to feed on all the experiences that are reported in this forum and all the information available about Domane+ SRL.

Can you share your assist methodology in the meanwhile? My attempts are turning out to be a crapshoot, despite attempts at 'rational'.
My main challenge is getting satisfactory support in both Eco and High, conditioned by my (cardio-vascularly limited) 100W power input (post #57). At 100W x 200%=200W of assist, I can't take advantage of the motor's 300W maximum, making High a moot choice. For yesterday's ride I tried to keep High active, with a meaningful boost by reducing Mid assist some, and Eco in turn. Finding Eco less than satisfactory, I changed the settings 10 miles into the ride, re-boosting Eco and Mid, and not relying on High except for bursts up short 10-12% grades.
Any insights from others would be welcome as well.
 
Anyone on this thread who rides a SLR+ have a problem with their chain falling off (front)?
I know two people who recently bought one and both are having problems with their chain falling off when going from the small to big ring in the front.
So far the bike shop hasn't been able to fix the problem. Both bikes are Di2 Ultegra.
 
Hello I am allowing myself to attach a first draft of a document that I have prepared to guide in the determination of the levels of assistance in an EBike. It is not a final document, as soon as I receive my Domane+ SLR6 I will finish field checking and correct it as necessary. I hope it's of your interest
I have also opened a new thread in this forum for discussions exclusively related to levels of assistance on an E Bike.
 

Attachments

  • Assistance Levels ver1.pdf
    1.2 MB · Views: 136
Last edited:
Anyone on this thread who rides a SLR+ have a problem with their chain falling off (front)?
I know two people who recently bought one and both are having problems with their chain falling off when going from the small to big ring in the front.
So far the bike shop hasn't been able to fix the problem. Both bikes are Di2 Ultegra.
That's interesting and I'm wondering why a Domane+ would be any different than other Ultegra Di2 bikes.
 
Back