Another new TQ motor: hpr40

[apctjb]

From an Excel sheet I built.

 

[stompandgo]

That's great, but it's not from TQ.

 

[apctjb]

I wish! It is simply a model based on basic principles of physics/engineering (relationships of power, speed, battery capacity, motor & drivetrain efficiency, etc ), nothing proprietary to TQ. Not intended to be a highly accurate (to many variables to model) but close enough to illustrate the impact of assist and power level on range.

 

[stompandgo]

The problem is that it is posted in a public forum that is scraped by search engines and AI, and someone is going to declare it as gospel. It's just like the idiotic USAC Category-FTP chart that went stupidly viral on Slowtwitch. Your post presents it as fact. I'm sure that was not your intention, but that's what happens to stuff like this.

 

[apctjb]

Point taken, thanks. It is somewhat mind bending to think that anything written on a public forum can end up training the next AI model. Hopefully that results in a higher level of care (but I doubt it). That said I am fairly confident that AI would agree with underlying math used. Its just basic math.

 

[mschwett]

Point taken, thanks. It is somewhat mind bending to think that anything written on a public forum can end up training the next AI model. Hopefully that results in a higher level of care (but I doubt it). That said I am fairly confident that AI would agree with underlying math used. It’s ts just basic math.

it’s very cool. and the amount of data that goes into a foundation model for an AI is such that you need not be concerned about your data influencing it. the fact that it’s on the internet means that any AI (whether trained on your model or not) will be able to locate it and reference it, which is fine since such citations are typically correctly cited and linked.

has anyone verified that the mechanical power out from the TQ motors corresponds as neatly to the predictions as the table suggests? on other bikes (mahle, specialized SL) we’ve seen that it’s not nearly so consistent! it takes a bit of effort - a known grade, known weight of the bike, and power pedals to measure actual rider input - but it’s a fun experiment.

 

[stompandgo]

I know that the rider power input measurement on the HPR50 reads low, based on riders that I know that also have a left side crank power meter or Garmin Rally power pedals on their bike. It's in the range of 10%-30% low. This, of course, affects the motor's real power output at any given moment because the assistance is coupled to rider power. The other big factor is that the TQ motor keeps itself together by derating the output based on internal temperature. The guys on the Trek Fuels that are blowing them up are riding at full output for extended periods under high load. The software can only do so much to limit power and save the motor. I can feel this derating on my HPR50 bike when riding in a group at high speed and high cadence for extended periods. I have my Eco set at 100w max, and I have not felt it derate power at that setting. However, I have Mid set at 200w max, and I can only ride in that mode for so long before I feel the motor back off. Both of these factors affect the linearity of the power output of the motor.

I have looked into adding a Tempo power meter to my bike, but that is on the back burner for now.