A Road-Cyclist Thoughts On E-Bikes

[Luto]

You can turn off the assist on the ebike and use it when you need it.

I have both. The e-bike without assist is not fun to ride up hills because the extra weight dampens the forward momentum enough that you cannot get a good thrust up hill between pedal strokes. I have ridden over 1200 miles on my e-gravel bike without assist. Since getting my new regular gravel bike, the rides are much more fun.

I will use my e-bike as a cargo mule now.

 

[Vamos]

I need to correct my characterization of the SL1.1 motor's power contribution. Communications with Specialized clarified that:
The SL1.1 can boost my 125W with 240W at 100% peak power maximum assist (at >70 rpm) for a total nominal power or 365W.
That goes a long way towards making the motor much more appealing, especially considering that it can operate up to 28mph.
Since the Fazua and Specialized motors both produce sufficient power to take on challenging climbs, the choice comes down to other aspects of the respective bikes.

Are you sure that it gives 2X the Watts that the rider is generating. I have the impression that in turbo, the SL1.1 motor on a Creo SL matches the rider’s output up to 240W. In your example, the rider’s output of 125W would be matched by the motor with 125W for a combined output of 250W. (The final output is double the rider’s output)

 

[ActionJackson]

the rider’s output of 125W would be matched by the motor with 125W for a combined output of 250W. (The final output is double the rider’s output)

That is my understanding as well.

 

[rdv]

... and it was my interpretation as well, based on the Specialized (poorly worded) text cited in my post #30. I was (supposedly) set straight by Specialized customer service, who specifically allowed that the motor could add up to 240W to my 125W for a theoretical 365W.
Input from SL1.1 users would be most welcome as a way to gain confirmation one way or another, and put the topic to rest ...at least till the next system update /upgrade .

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Are you sure that it gives 2X the Watts that the rider is generating. I have the impression that in turbo, the SL1.1 motor on a Creo SL matches the rider’s output up to 240W. In your example, the rider’s output of 125W would be matched by the motor with 125W for a combined output of 250W. (The final output is double the rider’s output)

I can say something I have verified with BLEvo app for my SL 1.1 motor. The amplification factor is indeed 1.8x in 100/100% Turbo mode.

If I input 133 W (or more), the motor responds with 240 W of power. It is drawing about 300 W from the battery in such a situation. As 240/300 = 0.8, the SL 1.1 motor has 80% efficiency.

 

[Vamos]

... and it was my interpretation as well, based on the Specialized (poorly worded) text cited in my post #30. I was (supposedly) set straight by Specialized customer service, who specifically allowed that the motor could add up to 240W to my 125W for a theoretical 365W.
Input from SL1.1 users would be most welcome as a way to gain confirmation one way or another, and put the topic to rest ...at least till the next system update /upgrade .

It is confusing. I think the customer service rep was wrong. I have a Creo with the 1.1. You can adjust the power and support for each level using the Mission Control app. The support allows the user to adjust the percent of the user‘s power that is matched. For example, if support is set as 35% in Eco mode, the motor will provide 35% of the rider’s power up to the motor’s power limit. The highest support level allowed is 100%, which means that the motor will match 100% of the riders’s output. It can not be set any higher, the motor will supply 240w only if the rider is also supplying 240w.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

It is confusing. I think the customer service rep was wrong. I have a Creo with the 1.1. You can adjust the power and support for each level using the Mission Control app. The support allows the user to adjust the percent of the user‘s power that is matched. For example, if support is set as 35% in Eco mode, the motor will provide 35% of the rider’s power up to the motor’s power limit. The highest support level allowed is 100%, which means that the motor will match 100% of the riders’s output. It can not be set any higher, the motor will supply 240w only if the rider is also supplying 240w.

It is not correct, Vamos. 100% of assistance in Specialized terms means 100% of available assistance, which is 1.8x you. I can prove it if you like.

 

[Calcoaster]

It is not correct, Vamos. 100% of assistance in Specialized terms means 100% of available assistance, which is 1.8x you. I can prove it if you like.

I asked specialized about the 1.1 power delivery and posed my question based on your 1.8 or 2 x the rider input that I read in your other postings. Based on what is see in Blevo, I thought your explanation made sense, but apparently it doesn’t work that way. Specialized said there is no multiplication - if set to 35%, then you get 35% of rider power added by the motor, up to the max power limit setting. I think the confusion is because there are several different ways to measure motor power: average, peak mechanical power, average and peak electric power. Here is the email response I got from specialized a few weeks ago:

We'll start from the bottom. The statement "2x You" refers to how much power the motor puts out along with your input. You can imagine it compared to how many "people" are riding the bike at once. In the case of the SL system this means the power output of our SL motors equals about as much as one typical rider or around 240 peak watts as an example. Plus your own power that equals "2x You". I hope that's helpful.

As for the actual motor power curve you're referring to this will depend of course on drive mode, rider input, and cadence. Your understanding is mostly accurate for the power modes, except that there is no multiplication done. For the SL system this means that when the motor power is at 35% it can supply a maximum of 35% of its highest possible power output. It does not provide 35% power with complete consistency however since it will vary with the cadence of your legs. In Mission Control "Power" refers to the peak power in a given drive mode. If it is set to 50% for instance the motor is only allowed to give 50% of its peak power regardless of rider effort. At 100% it can provide as much power as the motor is capable of if the rider is pedaling fast enough.

Separate from power is Support. Support adjusts how much effort is needed to reach peak power. With more assist, your peak power setting can be reached more easily. Also, the motor power is referring to mechanical power. You get the most out of the motor when you are pedaling between 70 and 110 rpm where the motor about tops out.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

I have no energy to explain it again. Use BLEvo, set the assistance to 100/100 and observe the rider power vs the power drawn from the battery (a.k.a. motor power). You will see that with the rider's power over 133 W the motor gets maxed out at 300 W of battery power draw. Then do your math.

The explanation you got from Specialized is wrong. Giant uses assistance figures from 50 - 360% and that's amplification from 0.5 to 3.6x.

I own two Specialized ebikes. My Vado 5/6 has 3.2x amplification and 520 W max power (or 666 W drawn from the battery). My Vado SL has 1.8x amplification and 240 W max power (300W power draw). In both cases assistance is 0-100%. Conclusions?

 

[BEC111]

My conclusion is that my brain explodes. All I know is that at default settings my Vado SL is easy to ride in ECO for as long as I want to ride. I don’t really feel any assisthave, but I can rider further than I can without assist. When is set ECO to 35-100 I start out the same. I can ride comfortably at any distance up to end of battery. But hills and passing become non-issues. And even at that sething, if is switch to Turbo at 100/100 the bike accelerates quickly with an obvious power boost.

The joy of the SL motor is its near invisibility when used in ECO and Sport modes. I feel so much stronger in normal riding. In full turbo it’s much more like the more like the higher torque bikes. More as though it’s a motorized bicycle.

 

[Vamos]

I can say something I have verified with BLEvo app for my SL 1.1 motor. The amplification factor is indeed 1.8x in 100/100% Turbo mode.

If I input 133 W (or more), the motor responds with 240 W of power. It is drawing about 300 W from the battery in such a situation. As 240/300 = 0.8, the SL 1.1 motor has 80% efficiency.

Stefan,
Does that have something to do with using BLEvo or would be the same with turbo set at 100% 100% using mission control?

 

[Captain Slow]

I think the power math is complicated by the fact there's a speed limiter. Maybe it's not a factor for the lucky Americans who get a 45 km/hr. speed limit. But for my Canadian bike I have a 32 km/hr. speed limit and it's not as simple as adding my power to the motor's max power to figure out how much power I'm getting. Numerous times I've been riding hard and I can hear the hum of the motor turn off as I hit the speed limiter.

There is one stretch I ride where the bike lane disappears for about 2 blocks and it's up about 1-2% incline. When I hit that stretch I generally sprint. In theory on the Creo for a short burst I can be putting down about 350 - 400 watts, so added to the 240 watts of the SL motor I should be over 600 watts and flying. Well, guess what I get hit with the 32 km/hr. limit and then I'm just riding a heavy bike with no motor assistance. On the same stretch I ride my Aethos and I go faster without a motor because I'm getting the same power down but with less weight going up the incline.

But maybe for Americans the speed limit is so much higher that it's not a factor. If so, then I'm jealous as I'd love to have a 45 km/hr. speed limit.

 

[JoeDP]

I agree with many of the sentiments stated here. I’m in the middle (I have both an e-bike and a 43 year old Peugeot which I just finished re-conditioning). My feelings are still in motion. I got back into biking at age 69 after retiring from a sedentary career and it was a test ride on my ex-wife’s new e-bike that got me back in to riding. For the first couple of months, I’ve spent most of my time on the e-bike, and it’s great.

Now that my Peugeot is finally together and working again, I am finding that I also enjoy riding that. It’s solid (33 lbs of steel frame , quiet and great. However, as someone else said, rides on that (for me especially) are in the 10 MPH average range. Also, there are a number of rides I would not want to take it on— such as trails and hills with those narrow tires and old-fashioned brakes. So, I am using both depending on where I want to go in any given day.

I try hard not to be a jerk when riding the e-bike. Most of the folks I am seeing when out riding are on road bikes, and many of them are serious riders who can go faster than I can even on the e-bike. Maybe I’ll get in better shape someday, but, for now, I’m not trying to race anyone.

We’ll see how I feel in a few months, especially as the days shorten and the weather cools and (who knows) I get into better shape.

Great discussion and topic— was something I’ve been thinking about too…

 

[rdv]

It sounded like a simple question...
I find Stefan Mikes' input most convincing, and put it in my own words in terms of power rather than percentages (percentages of what? ...too many combinations to toss around) or multipliers. My personal interest has always been in how much help the SL1.1 (or Fazua, or X35) motor would provide on challenging climbs that call for 300-350W of sustained power. It's clear that anything less demanding can be dealt with readily and comfortably.

Since an ailment (that I'm still sorting out) limits me to a sustained ~125W, I need the motor to add at least 175-225W. I now believe the SL1.1 would do that, and more, offering a nominal 240W (minus inefficiencies). I also gather that someone producing 175W could also call on the motor to add a nominal 240W, allowing him/her to climb faster, as would someone producing 240W or more, climbing faster yet. In other words, all riders can count on the motor's nominal 240W, some like me by necessity, others for added speed, with still others opting for less and longer, more balanced assistance.

Now back to the main point, to go riding, in whatever form it makes it enjoyable.

 

[mschwett]

I asked specialized about the 1.1 power delivery and posed my question based on your 1.8 or 2 x the rider input that I read in your other postings. Based on what is see in Blevo, I thought your explanation made sense, but apparently it doesn’t work that way. Specialized said there is no multiplication - if set to 35%, then you get 35% of rider power added by the motor, up to the max power limit setting. I think the confusion is because there are several different ways to measure motor power: average, peak mechanical power, average and peak electric power. Here is the email response I got from specialized a few weeks ago:

We'll start from the bottom. The statement "2x You" refers to how much power the motor puts out along with your input. You can imagine it compared to how many "people" are riding the bike at once. In the case of the SL system this means the power output of our SL motors equals about as much as one typical rider or around 240 peak watts as an example. Plus your own power that equals "2x You". I hope that's helpful.
...

specialized's lingo is very confusing here. "2x you" ... means the motor puts out 2x of what you put out. "100%" power in turbo mode means 100% of the 2x multiplication factor, up to whatever the motor is capable of. so if you're doing 150w, the motor will do 300w (the multiplication factor is "all" of 2x, 150 x 2 = 300.) the max input power on the SL motor is 300w.

i have bonked hard on a few rides, put my creo sl in turbo, and watched the "motor watts" display absolutely pegged to 300w while i was near comatose and only charitably putting out 150. i have the logs for many such rides, as shown here by strava, an average of just a bit over 150. the motor was flat out drawing 300w for this entire climb, an elevation gain of around 1,000 feet at 6,000 feet base.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Stefan,
Does that have something to do with using BLEvo or would be the same with turbo set at 100% 100% using mission control?

Mission Control and BLEvo are just two different input/output interfaces to the Turbo Control Unit (TCU). Same, you could connect a Garmin or Wahoo to the TCU for the data display, or you might read the data using Turbo Control Display (TDU). Bluetooth/ANT+ is a miracle!

Vamos: To convince you totally, give me a little bit of time. I need to find two rides where I rode in 100% Turbo mode: one with the SL, and another with the full power Vado. It is doable to show the Biker Power against Motor Power (that is, the power drawn from the battery) and calculate the amplification factor back from these values.

I think the power math is complicated by the fact there's a speed limiter. Maybe it's not a factor for the lucky Americans who get a 45 km/hr. speed limit. But for my Canadian bike I have a 32 km/hr. speed limit and it's not as simple as adding my power to the motor's max power to figure out how much power I'm getting. Numerous times I've been riding hard and I can hear the hum of the motor turn off as I hit the speed limiter.

You seem to be a fit person, and you are riding a road e-bike, so with the limiter disabled (and riding in the drops), you could probably be able to ride much faster than 32 km/h. I can totally delimit my Vado SL by a button press. Guess what: With the more relaxed riding position, and my bad legs, I can typically only hit 34 km/h in Turbo mode, and only in bursts.

On the other hand, lower speed attainable means greater battery range.

Specialized's lingo is very confusing here. "2x you" ... means the motor puts out 2x of what you put out.

It is very confusing. "2x you" or "4x you" are just marketing phrases. Here are the actual values:

• Mahle SL 1.1 motor: 1.8x
• Brose CB (Specialized 1.2e) motor: 2.8x
• Brose T (Specialized 1.2) motor: 3.2x
• Brose S Alu (Specialized 1.3) motor: 3.6x
• Brose S Mag (Specialized 2.1) motor: 3.6x

The good thing about the Specialized 0-100% system is it is transparent and universal for any newer Specialized Turbo e-bike: Levo, Kenevo, Vado, Como, Creo, Levo SL, Kenevo SL Vado SL, Como SL... So Specialized can keep Mission Control relatively simple (with only minor e-bike model specific differences), and it does not depend on the motor model.

• Support = percentage of the maximum amplification factor for given motor
• Max Motor Power = percentage of the maximum peak power available from given motor (a ceiling on the motor power).

Interesting fact is my Vado 5/6 has the amplification factor exactly twice of the Vado SL (3.2x vs 1.8x). Therefore, 100% Turbo mode of the SL is just 50% on the "big" Vado.

Since an ailment (that I'm still sorting out) limits me to a sustained ~125W, I need the motor to add at least 175-225W. I now believe the SL1.1 would do that, and more, offering a nominal 240W (minus inefficiencies). I also gather that someone producing 175W could also call on the motor to add a nominal 240W, allowing him/her to climb faster, as would someone producing 240W or more, climbing faster yet. In other words, all riders can count on the motor's nominal 240W, some like me by necessity, others for added speed, with still others opting for less and longer, more balanced assistance.

I am in a similar position. I learned to live with my ailment by using the SL for fitness/everyday rides (I feel the best when the assistance is at the level of "0.9x you", or 50% SL assistance), while I ride the full power Vado on demanding trips. With the latter, 35% assistance ("1.12x you") is sufficient to counter the bigger e-bike weight and maintain great battery range.

 

[Vamos]

Mission Control and BLEvo are just two different input/output interfaces to the Turbo Control Unit (TCU). Same, you could connect a Garmin or Wahoo to the TCU for the data display, or you might read the data using Turbo Control Display (TDU). Bluetooth/ANT+ is a miracle!

Vamos: To convince you totally, give me a little bit of time. I need to find two rides where I rode in 100% Turbo mode: one with the SL, and another with the full power Vado. It is doable to show the Biker Power against Motor Power (that is, the power drawn from the battery) and calculate the amplification factor back from these values.


You seem to be a fit person, and you are riding a road e-bike, so with the limiter disabled (and riding in the drops), you could probably be able to ride much faster than 32 km/h. I can totally delimit my Vado SL by a button press. Guess what: With the more relaxed riding position, and my bad legs, I can typically only hit 34 km/h in Turbo mode, and only in bursts.

On the other hand, lower speed attainable means greater battery range.


It is very confusing. "2x you" or "4x you" are just marketing phrases. Here are the actual values:

• Mahle SL 1.1 motor: 1.8x
• Brose CB (Specialized 1.2e) motor: 2.8x
• Brose T (Specialized 1.2) motor: 3.2x
• Brose S Alu (Specialized 1.3) motor: 3.6x
• Brose S Mag (Specialized 2.1) motor: 3.6x

The good thing about the Specialized 0-100% system is it is transparent and universal for any newer Specialized Turbo e-bike: Levo, Kenevo, Vado, Como, Creo, Levo SL, Kenevo SL Vado SL, Como SL... So Specialized can keep Mission Control relatively simple (with only minor e-bike model specific differences), and it does not depend on the motor model.

• Support = percentage of the maximum amplification factor for given motor
• Max Motor Power = percentage of the maximum peak power available from given motor (a ceiling on the motor power).

Interesting fact is my Vado 5/6 has the amplification factor exactly twice of the Vado SL (3.2x vs 1.8x). Therefore, 100% Turbo mode of the SL is just 50% on the "big" Vado.

I am in a similar position. I learned to live with my ailment by using the SL for fitness/everyday rides (I feel the best when the assistance is at the level of "0.9x you", or 50% SL assistance), while I ride the full power Vado on demanding trips. With the latter, 35% assistance ("1.12x you") is sufficient to counter the bigger e-bike weight and maintain great battery range.

This is confusing, certainly different than I thought. If I’m using Eco on my Creo and it is set at 35%, how much power is the motor adding when I’m generating 100 Watts?

 

[mschwett]

This is confusing, certainly different than I thought. If I’m using Eco on my Creo and it is set at 35%, how much power is the motor adding when I’m generating 100 Watts?

the multiplication factor would be .35 x 1.8, or .63. so it would use 63 watts. actual productive power is somewhat less, perhaps as much as 20% less, so 50ish.

i have my eco set to 25, my daily ride has a climb or around 250m and i try and do 200 - 225w for the climb, the motor uses 90-100w for the steepest sections. it tells us, for example, that if @Captain Slow’s creo was derestricted, and he was able to put out 200 sustained watts, the total of 440 (i’m using the output here, not the input - mission control displays the input which would be 300) is enough to go a bit over 45kph on level ground, no wind, on the drops. weight is not really a factor here.

i generally find bike calculator returns results fairly close to what i observe in the real world, especially for climbs and slightly lower speeds.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

the multiplication factor would be .35 x 1.8, or .63. so it would use 63 watts. actual productive power is somewhat less, perhaps as much as 20% less, so 50ish.

This is almost correct. One remark: The actual power would be 63 W but 63/0.8 = 79 W would be drawn from the battery (0.8 or 80% is the motor efficiency).

 

[mschwett]

This is almost correct. One remark: The actual power would be 63 W but 63/0.8 = 79 W would be drawn from the battery (0.8 or 80% is the motor efficiency).

that’s interesting, i thought the motor contribution was based battery draw, not output, but it makes more sense to be the way you describe. i’ll have to look more closely. should be easy to observe, since the mission control readout is input power. i wonder if specialized is smart enough to scale the factors a bit based on varying motor efficient at different cadences!

100% turbo, 300w battery draw, 240w “output,” 133w rider power. (240/1.8)

at 50% setting, to achieve 300w battery draw, 240w “output” requires 267w rider power. (300 x .8) / (1.8 x .5) = 267