Calculating and recalculating range

[Atlgaga]

I am a few hundred miles into my Vado 5.0 SL and trying to figure out what my effective range really is.
I setup a spreadsheet which includes the items I think impact my personal range:

mileage
Watt Hours used
Implied range calculation (Mileage / Watt Hours) X 320 (multiplier changed to 298, see below)
%support
elevation gain
average speed
dates and ride notes

And then today I ran the battery down to an indicated 5% - and power shut off.
My watt hours used on my 320 WH battery totaled 298 since last charge - meaning is shut down at 93% (not 95%) of rated capacity. So I changed the multiplier in my implied range calculation from 320 to 298.

This is the only time I've run the battery down that low - but I've run the range calculation after each ride. It is clear that elevation, speed and effort drastically impact the implied range - no surprise - but it's nice to see how. Implied range has been from 80.7 (10.8 mph avg, 19 mile ride, 908' elevation gain) to 33.9 (12.77 avg, , 16.7 miles, 1183' gain). The 80.7 was on a group ride where I used enough assist to keep up, but otherwise rode like I was on a regular bike with appropriate effort. The 33.9 was the second half of a solo 35 mile ride on a hot day, where I was ready to get home and not trying to put in any extra effort or conserve battery.

I think this is giving me a good handle on what I can expect if I know something about my route. And some flexibility for ride length, knowing how aggressive I can be using various assist levels and still leaving enough to get over the last steep hills going home where I really want a bit more than a bit of support after a long ride.

A couple of lessons learned -
1. A battery rating of 320 Watt hours does not mean there are 320 usable Watt hours. When the "meter" on the TDU shows 5% your tank is on empty. (but I guess your lights stay on!!!)
2. Either the % shown on the TDU is a bit off, or the reported Watt hours on Mission control are a bit off. Don't suppose it matters which.
3. Using turbo (set at 100%) is relatively a very fast drain on the battery - but I guess we all knew that.
4. Yes, you can hit the rated 80 mile range... if you do most of the riding, don't ride too fast, or climb too many hills. (my support level on that ride was 51.4)

Be interested in the experience of others.

J

 

[GuruUno]

Well, I went on a 34-mile ride yesterday with the extra battery on my Vado 5 SL and these were the stats:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BLEvo: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:22:38 EDT​

BLEvo v3.7.3 iOS
- Battery Consumed: 25% (82 Wh)
- Consumption average: 4.32 Wh/mi
- Wh ride: 237Wh
- Wh Biker: 65.4% (155Wh)
- Wh Battery: 34.6% (82Wh)

------------------
Full statistics:

Firmware: 2.4
User Settings:
"Advanced user": 25/65/100 PP 35/60/100 ACC 0% Shuttle 0%

Assistance average: 33.3%
- ECO: 25.0%
- TRAIL: 65.0%
- TURBO: 100.0%

Ride Time:
- Start time: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:22:38 EDT
- Stop time: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 15:53:11 EDT
- Elapsed time:1:22:02
- ECO: 1:09:41 (84.9%)
- TRAIL: 0:09:09 (11.2%)
- TURBO: 0:03:11 (3.9%)

Battery:
- Start: 149% (484 Wh)
- End: 124% (402 Wh)
- Consumed: 25% (82 Wh)
- ECO: 13.4% (43 Wh)
- TRAIL: 6.9% (22 Wh)
- TURBO: 4.7% (15 Wh)

Consumption average: 4.32 Wh/mi
- ECO: 2.79 Wh/mi
- TRAIL: 8.94 Wh/mi
- TURBO: 20.28 Wh/mi

Battery Temperature:
- Min: 78°F
- Max: 86°F
- Average: 81°F

Motor Temperature:
- Min: 80°F
- Max: 127°F
- Average: 105°F

Miles Total: 19.00 mi
- ECO: 15.71 (82.6%)
- TRAIL: 2.53 (13.3%)
- TURBO: 0.76 (4.0%)

Miles Total with assistance: 15.50/19.00 mi (81.6 %)
- ECO: 12.67/15.71 mi (80.7%)
- TRAIL: 2.06/2.53 mi (81.5%)
- TURBO: 0.76/0.76 mi (99.6%)

Speed average: 13.9 mph
- ECO: 13.5 mph
- TRAIL: 16.6 mph
- TURBO: 14.4 mph

Speed Max: 25.3 mph
- ECO: 25.3 mph (14:39:36 - mi 2.72)
- TRAIL: 24.6 mph (15:30:27 - mi 14.18)
- TURBO: 22.0 mph (15:02:39 - mi 7.99)

Cadence average: 72 rpm
- ECO: 72 rpm
- TRAIL: 73 rpm
- TURBO: 75 rpm

Cadence Max: 122 rpm
- ECO: 122 rpm (14:54:34 - mi 9.50)
- TRAIL: 95 rpm (15:23:49 - mi 20.17)
- TURBO: 88 rpm (15:03:26 - mi 13.24)

Kcal consumed: 607 Kcal
- ECO: 503 Kcal
- TRAIL: 65 Kcal
- TURBO: 39 Kcal

Biker power average: 135 Watt
- ECO: 133 Watt
- TRAIL: 129 Watt
- TURBO: 185 Watt

Biker power Max: 572 W
- ECO: 572 W (15:19:09 - mi 18.39)
- TRAIL: 301 W (15:34:00 - mi 24.43)
- TURBO: 335 W (15:02:58 - mi 13.02)

Total Wh Biker: 155 Wh
- ECO: 128 Wh (82.9 %)
- TRAIL: 16 Wh (10.7 %)
- TURBO: 9 Wh (6.4 %)

Motor power average: 75 Watt
- ECO: 48 Watt
- TRAIL: 182 Watt
- TURBO: 292 Watt

Motor power Max: 306 W
- ECO: 212 W (15:36:45 - mi 25.59)
- TRAIL: 300 W (15:03:45 - mi 13.39)
- TURBO: 306 W (15:28:04 - mi 21.82)

Total Wh motor: 82 Wh
- ECO: 44 Wh (53.5 %)
- TRAIL: 22 Wh (27.6 %)
- TURBO: 15 Wh (18.9 %)

Max Altitude: 167 ft
Min Altitude: 16 ft

Ascent total: +436 ft
- ECO: 253 ft (58.1 %)
- TRAIL: 61 ft (14.0 %)
- TURBO: 122 ft (28.2 %)

Descent total: -419 ft
- ECO: 379 ft (90.3 %)
- TRAIL: 43 ft (10.4 %)
- TURBO: 0 ft (0.0 %)

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Jay, BLEvo app gives you a very accurate estimate of range. It is only unaware the last 5% of the battery is unusable.

 

[Atlgaga]

Well, I went on a 34-mile ride yesterday with the extra battery on my Vado 5 SL and these were the stats:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BLEvo: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:22:38 EDT​

BLEvo v3.7.3 iOS
- Battery Consumed: 25% (82 Wh)
- Consumption average: 4.32 Wh/mi
- Wh ride: 237Wh
- Wh Biker: 65.4% (155Wh)
- Wh Battery: 34.6% (82Wh)
------------------
Full statistics:
Firmware: 2.4
User Settings:
"Advanced user": 25/65/10

Thanks. That's a whole lot of information! Any issues setting up BLEvo for the VADO SL? The manual makes no reference to the 1.1 motor not to the Vado.

Jay

 

[Atlgaga]

Jay, BLEvo app gives you a very accurate estimate of range. It is only unaware the last 5% of the battery is unusable.

Thanks, Stefan

i bought the BLEvo app and downloaded the manual ... have not yet configured my bike to the app. I am a bit lost on "real" wheel circumference. As of now, Mission Control is giving me a different ride distance and average speed by about 3 or 4% than the TDU or my iPhone. I assume this is because Mission Control assumes a wheel diameter to calculate speed and distance, and that doesn't take into account tire inflation, wear, or rider weight.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Thanks, Stefan

i bought the BLEvo app and downloaded the manual ... have not yet configured my bike to the app. I am a bit lost on "real" wheel circumference. As of now, Mission Control is giving me a different ride distance and average speed by about 3 or 4% than the TDU or my iPhone. I assume this is because Mission Control assumes a wheel diameter to calculate speed and distance, and that doesn't take into account tire inflation, wear, or rider weight.

Please keep the "real wheel circumference" as is. Don't fight it please Should I elaborate why?

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Thanks. That's a whole lot of information! Any issues setting up BLEvo for the VADO SL? The manual makes no reference to the 1.1 motor not to the Vado.

Jay

No issues whatsoever.

 

[BioWheel]

I am a few hundred miles into my Vado 5.0 SL and trying to figure out what my effective range really is.
I setup a spreadsheet which includes the items I think impact my personal range:

mileage
Watt Hours used
Implied range calculation (Mileage / Watt Hours) X 320 (multiplier changed to 298, see below)
%support
elevation gain
average speed
dates and ride notes

And then today I ran the battery down to an indicated 5% - and power shut off.
My watt hours used on my 320 WH battery totaled 298 since last charge - meaning is shut down at 93% (not 95%) of rated capacity. So I changed the multiplier in my implied range calculation from 320 to 298.

This is the only time I've run the battery down that low - but I've run the range calculation after each ride. It is clear that elevation, speed and effort drastically impact the implied range - no surprise - but it's nice to see how. Implied range has been from 80.7 (10.8 mph avg, 19 mile ride, 908' elevation gain) to 33.9 (12.77 avg, , 16.7 miles, 1183' gain). The 80.7 was on a group ride where I used enough assist to keep up, but otherwise rode like I was on a regular bike with appropriate effort. The 33.9 was the second half of a solo 35 mile ride on a hot day, where I was ready to get home and not trying to put in any extra effort or conserve battery.

I think this is giving me a good handle on what I can expect if I know something about my route. And some flexibility for ride length, knowing how aggressive I can be using various assist levels and still leaving enough to get over the last steep hills going home where I really want a bit more than a bit of support after a long ride.

A couple of lessons learned -
1. A battery rating of 320 Watt hours does not mean there are 320 usable Watt hours. When the "meter" on the TDU shows 5% your tank is on empty. (but I guess your lights stay on!!!)
2. Either the % shown on the TDU is a bit off, or the reported Watt hours on Mission control are a bit off. Don't suppose it matters which.
3. Using turbo (set at 100%) is relatively a very fast drain on the battery - but I guess we all knew that.
4. Yes, you can hit the rated 80 mile range... if you do most of the riding, don't ride too fast, or climb too many hills. (my support level on that ride was 51.4)

Be interested in the experience of others.

J

Thanks for the data.

 

[kahn]

I believe most of the effect I see is from HILLS.

 

[Atlgaga]

I believe most of the effect I see is from HILLS.

: ) yes, hills, plus RCAoB - ("Rider's Current Attitude on Bike")

 

[Ebiker53]

I am a few hundred miles into my Vado 5.0 SL and trying to figure out what my effective range really is.
I setup a spreadsheet which includes the items I think impact my personal range:

mileage
Watt Hours used
Implied range calculation (Mileage / Watt Hours) X 320 (multiplier changed to 298, see below)
%support
elevation gain
average speed
dates and ride notes

And then today I ran the battery down to an indicated 5% - and power shut off.
My watt hours used on my 320 WH battery totaled 298 since last charge - meaning is shut down at 93% (not 95%) of rated capacity. So I changed the multiplier in my implied range calculation from 320 to 298.

This is the only time I've run the battery down that low - but I've run the range calculation after each ride. It is clear that elevation, speed and effort drastically impact the implied range - no surprise - but it's nice to see how. Implied range has been from 80.7 (10.8 mph avg, 19 mile ride, 908' elevation gain) to 33.9 (12.77 avg, , 16.7 miles, 1183' gain). The 80.7 was on a group ride where I used enough assist to keep up, but otherwise rode like I was on a regular bike with appropriate effort. The 33.9 was the second half of a solo 35 mile ride on a hot day, where I was ready to get home and not trying to put in any extra effort or conserve battery.

I think this is giving me a good handle on what I can expect if I know something about my route. And some flexibility for ride length, knowing how aggressive I can be using various assist levels and still leaving enough to get over the last steep hills going home where I really want a bit more than a bit of support after a long ride.

A couple of lessons learned -
1. A battery rating of 320 Watt hours does not mean there are 320 usable Watt hours. When the "meter" on the TDU shows 5% your tank is on empty. (but I guess your lights stay on!!!)
2. Either the % shown on the TDU is a bit off, or the reported Watt hours on Mission control are a bit off. Don't suppose it matters which.
3. Using turbo (set at 100%) is relatively a very fast drain on the battery - but I guess we all knew that.
4. Yes, you can hit the rated 80 mile range... if you do most of the riding, don't ride too fast, or climb too many hills. (my support level on that ride was 51.4)

Be interested in the experience of others.

J

Wind speed will affect range as will rider/equipment weight.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

The range considerations need to take many parameters into account. Here are the main factors eating up the battery charge:

• Rolling resistance
• Air drag
• Gaining kinetic energy
• Gaining potential energy
• Electronic considerations.

Rolling resistance
It is down to the type of terrain ridden, the tyre type, and to inflation pressure. Of course, smooth asphalt offers far lower rolling resistance than gravel or (especially) dirt. Thick knobby tyres cost a lot of battery charge compared to thin slicks. Lowly inflated tyres will use more of battery charge but are beneficial for ride comfort and better traction. Just compare typical road bike/asphalt vs MTB/forest speeds on traditional bikes.

Air drag
Theory explains that with all other parameters constant, the power demand grows in the third power (cubic) of the increasing relative speed of the bike/cyclist/cargo against the surrounding air.

• If you want to ride fast, expect high battery charge use;
• If there is headwind, maintaining good speed will cost the battery charge, but:
  • Provided the wind is blowing with constant speed from the same direction, riding a loop will greatly cancel the headwind losses on the tailwind ride segment
  • It is a grave mistake to plan a loop route starting downwind, as that typically ends up with an empty battery
• Rider's/bike/cargo frontal area: Just compare the speed of a road bike with a slim cyclist riding in the drops, and wearing spandex to the speed of a cruiser bike with a big cyclist wearing casual clothes (even a poncho) taking the upright riding position and carrying panniers and/or a trailer. The latter (cyclist) is just an air-brake.

Kinetic energy
Whenever you start riding your e-bike, and you accelerate, the battery charge (plus your own pedalling) are converted into the kinetic energy. Kinetic energy gain depends on the moving object mass and acceleration. The heavier the rider/bike/cargo combo is and the more the bike accelerates, the more battery energy is spent. Now, if you let your e-bike coast, part of the kinetic energy is used to maintain the bike's motion until other resistances eat the kinetic energy as much as the bike stops. Note: heavy rider/bike/cargo object will coast far longer. If you, however, use the brakes, your precious kinetic energy will be irreversibly lost to heat in the brakes.

Constant speed on the ride = low battery expenditure. Frequent starts/stops/acceleration = high battery use.

Note: Riding at constant speed in a straight line means you do not waste any battery charge for kinetic energy gain; only rolling resistance and air-drag are countered.

Potential energy
Whenever the rider/bike/cargo combo is to gain elevation, the rider's leg power + the battery charge are converted into the potential energy. Potential energy gain is the product of the object mass and of the elevation gain. It is why hills cost you so much of the battery juice.

Now, it is an interesting phenomenon: the descent. As you're riding downhill, the potential energy is converted to the kinetic energy (you're accelerating, and a heavy object accelerates more). If you can allow coasting on a descent, no battery energy is spent whatsoever. So you have lost battery charge on climbing but your range would increase greatly if you could coast downhill for many miles/kilometres. There is, however, a big "if". If you need to apply the brakes on descents, the precious potential energy gets irreversibly lost to heat.

See this interesting chart:

A planned mountain road trip (a loop) had three big hills in each direction (plus a small one at the ride midpoint). With the spare battery setup, it was necessary to meticulously plan the battery use. It was my fifth mountain riding day, and I had the assistance plan established (the values refer to the full power Vado 5.0 with two 600 Wh batteries and 38T chainring):

• Eco: 40/60%: used for the rides on the flat or against mild ascents
• Sport: 60/80%: used for intermediately steep ascents
• Turbo: 100/100%: used for climbing steep ascents (like, 10-12% grade)

Now: I was using BLEvo to determine the remaining battery #1 range on the outbound leg of the ride (with the 5% safety factor). In case I couldn't make my destination, I would simply give up and start the return leg. I reached my target with some 10% of the battery. Therefore, I was pedalling with the power OFF using the descent nature of the first return segment, and then I rode up mild ascent until the battery #1 reached 5% state of charge and needed to be swapped. At that point, I cleared 57% of the route, so I was on the safe side.

At some point, I was chasing a roadie on a mild descent, and could afford riding in Turbo mode (the energy expenditure downhill is low, as the most of the energy comes from the potential energy loss). Additionally, I knew the very last segment of that ride would mean mostly coasting, so I felt no range anxiety at all.

Electronic considerations

• The more energy your legs can input, the less of battery energy is spent (as long as we'are talking the same average speed)
• Low ambient temperature provides far less energy available from the battery. Important in the wintertime.

Have I forgotten anything?

 

[Atlgaga]

The range considerations need to take many parameters into account. Here are the main factors eating up the battery charge:

• Rolling resistance
• Air drag
• Gaining kinetic energy
• Gaining potential energy
• Electronic considerations.

Rolling resistance
It is down to the type of terrain ridden, the tyre type, and to inflation pressure. Of course, smooth asphalt offers far lower rolling resistance than gravel or (especially) dirt. Thick knobby tyres cost a lot of battery charge compared to thin slicks. Lowly inflated tyres will use more of battery charge but are beneficial for ride comfort and better traction. Just compare typical road bike/asphalt vs MTB/forest speeds on traditional bikes.

Air drag
Theory explains that with all other parameters constant, the power demand grows in the third power (cubic) of the increasing relative speed of the bike/cyclist/cargo against the surrounding air.

• If you want to ride fast, expect high battery charge use;
• If there is headwind, maintaining good speed will cost the battery charge, but:
  • Provided the wind is blowing with constant speed from the same direction, riding a loop will greatly cancel the headwind losses on the tailwind ride segment
  • It is a grave mistake to plan a loop route starting downwind, as that typically ends up with an empty battery
• Rider's/bike/cargo frontal area: Just compare the speed of a road bike with a slim cyclist riding in the drops, and wearing spandex to the speed of a cruiser bike with a big cyclist wearing casual clothes (even a poncho) taking the upright riding position and carrying panniers and/or a trailer. The latter (cyclist) is just an air-brake.

Kinetic energy
Whenever you start riding your e-bike, and you accelerate, the battery charge (plus your own pedalling) are converted into the kinetic energy. Kinetic energy gain depends on the moving object mass and acceleration. The heavier the rider/bike/cargo combo is and the more the bike accelerates, the more battery energy is spent. Now, if you let your e-bike coast, part of the kinetic energy is used to maintain the bike's motion until other resistances eat the kinetic energy as much as the bike stops. Note: heavy rider/bike/cargo object will coast far longer. If you, however, use the brakes, your precious kinetic energy will be irreversibly lost to heat in the brakes.

Constant speed on the ride = low battery expenditure. Frequent starts/stops/acceleration = high battery use.

Note: Riding at constant speed in a straight line means you do not waste any battery charge for kinetic energy gain; only rolling resistance and air-drag are countered.

Potential energy
Whenever the rider/bike/cargo combo is to gain elevation, the rider's leg power + the battery charge are converted into the potential energy. Potential energy gain is the product of the object mass and of the elevation gain. It is why hills cost you so much of the battery juice.

Now, it is an interesting phenomenon: the descent. As you're riding downhill, the potential energy is converted to the kinetic energy (you're accelerating, and a heavy object accelerates more). If you can allow coasting on a descent, no battery energy is spent whatsoever. So you have lost battery charge on climbing but your range would increase greatly if you could coast downhill for many miles/kilometres. There is, however, a big "if". If you need to apply the brakes on descents, the precious potential energy gets irreversibly lost to heat.

See this interesting chart:
View attachment 97956
A planned mountain road trip (a loop) had three big hills in each direction (plus a small one at the ride midpoint). With the spare battery setup, it was necessary to meticulously plan the battery use. It was my fifth mountain riding day, and I had the assistance plan established (the values refer to the full power Vado 5.0 with two 600 Wh batteries and 38T chainring):

• Eco: 40/60%: used for the rides on the flat or against mild ascents
• Sport: 60/80%: used for intermediately steep ascents
• Turbo: 100/100%: used for climbing steep ascents (like, 10-12% grade)

Now: I was using BLEvo to determine the remaining battery #1 range on the outbound leg of the ride (with the 5% safety factor). In case I couldn't make my destination, I would simply give up and start the return leg. I reached my target with some 10% of the battery. Therefore, I was pedalling with the power OFF using the descent nature of the first return segment, and then I rode up mild ascent until the battery #1 reached 5% state of charge and needed to be swapped. At that point, I cleared 57% of the route, so I was on the safe side.

At some point, I was chasing a roadie on a mild descent, and could afford riding in Turbo mode (the energy expenditure downhill is low, as the most of the energy comes from the potential energy loss). Additionally, I knew the very last segment of that ride would mean mostly coasting, so I felt no range anxiety at all.

Electronic considerations

• The more energy your legs can input, the less of battery energy is spent (as long as we'are talking the same average speed)
• Low ambient temperature provides far less energy available from the battery. Important in the wintertime.

Have I forgotten anything?

Answer to question? https://www.cybersalt.org/clean-jokes/where-did-i-come-from

Sounds like a plan!! I lose weight, lose wait (ride slower), lose the poncho, and ride on smooth roads, downwind and down hill in all directions. I'll hit that Specialized 80 mile promise for sure.



Jay

 

[kahn]

The range considerations need to take many parameters into account. Here are the main factors eating up the battery charge:

• Rolling resistance
• Air drag
• Gaining kinetic energy
• Gaining potential energy
• Electronic considerations.

Rolling resistance
It is down to the type of terrain ridden, the tyre type, and to inflation pressure. Of course, smooth asphalt offers far lower rolling resistance than gravel or (especially) dirt. Thick knobby tyres cost a lot of battery charge compared to thin slicks. Lowly inflated tyres will use more of battery charge but are beneficial for ride comfort and better traction. Just compare typical road bike/asphalt vs MTB/forest speeds on traditional bikes.

Air drag
Theory explains that with all other parameters constant, the power demand grows in the third power (cubic) of the increasing relative speed of the bike/cyclist/cargo against the surrounding air.

• If you want to ride fast, expect high battery charge use;
• If there is headwind, maintaining good speed will cost the battery charge, but:
  • Provided the wind is blowing with constant speed from the same direction, riding a loop will greatly cancel the headwind losses on the tailwind ride segment
  • It is a grave mistake to plan a loop route starting downwind, as that typically ends up with an empty battery
• Rider's/bike/cargo frontal area: Just compare the speed of a road bike with a slim cyclist riding in the drops, and wearing spandex to the speed of a cruiser bike with a big cyclist wearing casual clothes (even a poncho) taking the upright riding position and carrying panniers and/or a trailer. The latter (cyclist) is just an air-brake.

Kinetic energy
Whenever you start riding your e-bike, and you accelerate, the battery charge (plus your own pedalling) are converted into the kinetic energy. Kinetic energy gain depends on the moving object mass and acceleration. The heavier the rider/bike/cargo combo is and the more the bike accelerates, the more battery energy is spent. Now, if you let your e-bike coast, part of the kinetic energy is used to maintain the bike's motion until other resistances eat the kinetic energy as much as the bike stops. Note: heavy rider/bike/cargo object will coast far longer. If you, however, use the brakes, your precious kinetic energy will be irreversibly lost to heat in the brakes.

Constant speed on the ride = low battery expenditure. Frequent starts/stops/acceleration = high battery use.

Note: Riding at constant speed in a straight line means you do not waste any battery charge for kinetic energy gain; only rolling resistance and air-drag are countered.

Potential energy
Whenever the rider/bike/cargo combo is to gain elevation, the rider's leg power + the battery charge are converted into the potential energy. Potential energy gain is the product of the object mass and of the elevation gain. It is why hills cost you so much of the battery juice.

Now, it is an interesting phenomenon: the descent. As you're riding downhill, the potential energy is converted to the kinetic energy (you're accelerating, and a heavy object accelerates more). If you can allow coasting on a descent, no battery energy is spent whatsoever. So you have lost battery charge on climbing but your range would increase greatly if you could coast downhill for many miles/kilometres. There is, however, a big "if". If you need to apply the brakes on descents, the precious potential energy gets irreversibly lost to heat.

See this interesting chart:
View attachment 97956
A planned mountain road trip (a loop) had three big hills in each direction (plus a small one at the ride midpoint). With the spare battery setup, it was necessary to meticulously plan the battery use. It was my fifth mountain riding day, and I had the assistance plan established (the values refer to the full power Vado 5.0 with two 600 Wh batteries and 38T chainring):

• Eco: 40/60%: used for the rides on the flat or against mild ascents
• Sport: 60/80%: used for intermediately steep ascents
• Turbo: 100/100%: used for climbing steep ascents (like, 10-12% grade)

Now: I was using BLEvo to determine the remaining battery #1 range on the outbound leg of the ride (with the 5% safety factor). In case I couldn't make my destination, I would simply give up and start the return leg. I reached my target with some 10% of the battery. Therefore, I was pedalling with the power OFF using the descent nature of the first return segment, and then I rode up mild ascent until the battery #1 reached 5% state of charge and needed to be swapped. At that point, I cleared 57% of the route, so I was on the safe side.

At some point, I was chasing a roadie on a mild descent, and could afford riding in Turbo mode (the energy expenditure downhill is low, as the most of the energy comes from the potential energy loss). Additionally, I knew the very last segment of that ride would mean mostly coasting, so I felt no range anxiety at all.

Electronic considerations

• The more energy your legs can input, the less of battery energy is spent (as long as we'are talking the same average speed)
• Low ambient temperature provides far less energy available from the battery. Important in the wintertime.

Have I forgotten anything?

Yes. Did you breathe while writing that?

 

[Stefan Mikes]

My profession is a technical one

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Sounds like a plan!! I lose weight, lose wait (ride slower), lose the poncho, and ride on smooth roads, downwind and down hill in all directions. I'll hit that Specialized 80 mile promise for sure.

A Range Extender or two would fit the bill instead

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Jay @Atlgaga,

Now see what you can expect from Vado SL (with Range Extender) if you agree to ride slowly (distances are in km, speed in km/h. Divide by 1.609 for miles. You can also take the 10% safety factor into consideration)

Average assistance level was 44%, and my own contribution was 62.3%. Battery consumption (recalculated to the main battery) was 72%.

 

[Atlgaga]

Jay @Atlgaga,

Now see what you can expect from Vado SL (with Range Extender) if you agree to ride slowly (distances are in km, speed in km/h. Divide by 1.609 for miles. You can also take the 10% safety factor into consideration)

View attachment 98085
Average assistance level was 44%, and my own contribution was 62.3%. Battery consumption (recalculated to the main battery) was 72%.

A nice ride! And you said you weren't strong. (I thought I was using Blevo today - but it shut down almost immediately. I think I figured out tonight that though I connected the Bike with bluetooth, I didn't enable bluetooth in the iPhone Blevo app settings in addition to the iPhone bluetooth settings. We'll see tomorrow.)

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Being durable doesn't mean strong... My ailment prevents me from maintaining high leg power, so the average speed was just 11.3 mph. Now, such low speed practically takes the air drag out from the equation, resulting in tremendous battery range. (Good my friend is a 74-yo healthy person riding a traditional e-bike!)

Regarding Bluetooth, I keep it always on with my smartphones.