EBR made me do it! (new Vado SL 5.0 EQ)

Who knows what the phase current is coming from the controller to the motor. That would make a huge difference.
 
Jeremy McCreary said:
Thanks! If the Yoshi were the right color, I'd pay the price for the Racktime compatibility. But gray is their only offering, and I recall some complaints about shipping times (at least on Amazon).
Click to expand...
I use the gray Yoshi and it's a well made bag. The gray looks good IMO. I bought all my Racktime stuff from this store:

Carson City Bike Shop | Mountain Bike & Road Bike Parts

Huge Savings on all road, mountain and BMX bikes parts, components, tires, wheels and accessories! Free shipping on qualifying orders.
carsoncitybikeshop.com carsoncitybikeshop.com
Both selection, availability and shipping were good.
 
sanyata said:
I use the gray Yoshi and it's a well made bag. The gray looks good IMO. I bought all my Racktime stuff from this store:

Carson City Bike Shop | Mountain Bike & Road Bike Parts

Huge Savings on all road, mountain and BMX bikes parts, components, tires, wheels and accessories! Free shipping on qualifying orders.
carsoncitybikeshop.com carsoncitybikeshop.com
Both selection, availability and shipping were good.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Wow, what a selection! Website seems to be having some issues right now, but I'll definitely check back.

Agree, the Yoshi is a good-looking bag, but gray doesn't work with my yellow and black color scheme. Usually a function over form guy, but not on this front.
 
Jeremy,
I was thinking about the problem you set. Did you try riding the same hilly route in the maximum assistance on either e-bike on the same day? If you did, we could do a little comparison based on the average speed (for instance).

Some hypotheses:
  • 500 W could be the max electric motor power of the hub drive. The electric power of the SL 1.1 motor is 303 W. (I would ignore the max torque value as you do not know the reference angular speed of the hub-drive motor).
  • Hub-drive motors love to be spinning. A hub-drive motor has a very low efficiency when it rotates slowly (which happens on any climb). A mid-drive motor is very efficient at a proper pedalling cadence, which you achieve by gearing.
  • The assistance provided by the hub-drive motor is constant per assist level but it is variable on the mid-drive motor and depends on your pedalling power. (It is not just the torque sensor: it is the torque and cadence sensors which are both used to determine your pedalling power by the system).
A little calculation.

Assume your leg power on the climb to be 148 W and 60/60% SPORT. The max Assist of SL 1.1 is 1.8x. Electrical motor power provided will be 0.6 (Assist) * 1.8 (max Assist) * 148 (leg power) / 0.79 (motor efficiency) = 202 W. The electrical SL 1.1 motor power of 303 W will be capped at 60%, or 182 W (above the assist calculated above). Meaning, the electrical power drawn from the battery is 202 W. Now, how do you know what the actual power drawn from the battery by the hub drive motor is on the same climb?

You can only compare the performance of both motors by riding both e-bikes in the maximum assistance on the same route in the same conditions.
 
Stefan Mikes said:
Jeremy,
I was thinking about the problem you set. Did you try riding the same hilly route in the maximum assistance on either e-bike on the same day? If you did, we could do a little comparison based on the average speed (for instance).

Some hypotheses:
  • 500 W could be the max electric motor power of the hub drive. The electric power of the SL 1.1 motor is 303 W. (I would ignore the max torque value as you do not know the reference angular speed of the hub-drive motor).
  • Hub-drive motors love to be spinning. A hub-drive motor has a very low efficiency when it rotates slowly (which happens on any climb). A mid-drive motor is very efficient at a proper pedalling cadence, which you achieve by gearing.
  • The assistance provided by the hub-drive motor is constant per assist level but it is variable on the mid-drive motor and depends on your pedalling power. (It is not just the torque sensor: it is the torque and cadence sensors which are both used to determine your pedalling power by the system).
A little calculation.

Assume your leg power on the climb to be 148 W and 60/60% SPORT. The max Assist of SL 1.1 is 1.8x. Electrical motor power provided will be 0.6 (Assist) * 1.8 (max Assist) * 148 (leg power) / 0.79 (motor efficiency) = 202 W. The electrical SL 1.1 motor power of 303 W will be capped at 60%, or 182 W (above the assist calculated above). Meaning, the electrical power drawn from the battery is 202 W. Now, how do you know what the actual power drawn from the battery by the hub drive motor is on the same climb?

You can only compare the performance of both motors by riding both e-bikes in the maximum assistance on the same route in the same conditions.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Good points, but I'll have to mull over the details.

One thing I have to disagree with quite strongly: My hub-drive has an excellent torque-sensing assist system and most definitely doles out assist according to pedal force. And it does this quite well without a true cadence sensor. Selecting an assist level only caps the max power available in that level.
 
With a hub drive and going up a steep incline you need your legs to keep the motor happy. Then hub motors are great,
and not so bad if you got the gears.
 
gromike said:
With a hub drive and going up a steep incline you need your legs to keep the motor happy. Then hub motors are great,
and not so bad if you got the gears.
Click to expand...
Agree. With a hub-drive, you have to keep your wheel speed up — generally by entering the base of the hill at the highest possible ground speed. With my mid-drive, you need to keep your cadence up.

Either way, you need the right gearing. Had to lower the gearing on both bikes to improve climbing — in the hub-drive's case, to be able to finish the climb on my own steam as wheel speed bogged down and motor efficiency tanked.
 
The bike that EBR built
The new SL's pretty much finished for now — just waiting for a saddle bag and an ABUS folding lock holder for the top tube. The bike itself and every accessory and mod seen here came out of recommendations or discussions on EBR. Thank you all once again!

20240920_170209.jpg

At Moonlight Beach today, right after getting 38 mm tubeless Pathfinders installed a few blocks away at Cadence Cyclery of Encinitas. Based on a list compiled from several EBR posts, they also got me tooled up for tubeless field repairs.

Generally have mixed feelings about gum sidewalls but kinda like 'em here. (No, didn't even try to ride it in this loose sand.)

20240920_165804.jpg

Put on the Pathfinders mainly to (a) smooth out the ride, and (b) improve offroad grip with little sacrifice in pavement performance. Big win on (a) at 30 psi, and (b) will be tested tomorrow.

Asked the shop to put the tires at the lowest safe pressure for the ride home — just to see the effect on compliance. The owner/manager chimed in that he's had good luck with his own Pathfinders at 30 psi, so 30 psi it was (despite the 50-80 psi on the sidewalls).
 
Last edited:
Lovin' the SL 5.0 EQ more everyday, but getting frustrated with the Racktime rack. Still don't want a standard-sized trunk bag back there for now, but I DO want to make use of this rack.

Q1. Is it for SnapIT or SnapIT 2.0 adapters? The Racktime site gives distinguishing characteristics that don't exactly match the rack I have.

Also, found a 10x10" bungee net that's a workable size for bulkier temporary loads like a warmer jacket or take-home food order But the racks side- and cross-bars offer insecure attachment points for its 4 hooks.

Guess the next try is an old-fashioned 3-strap bike rack bungee.

Q2. @Stefan Mikes , are you still happy with your Ortlieb Quick-Rack replacement? Was it easy to install?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
20240924_184537.jpg

SL fully outfitted for local rides. The Topeak MondoPack saddle bag suggested by @Saratoga Dave added enough storage for now.

20240924_184716.jpg

Probably violated some code of honor by fitting a bell as big as this Incredibell XL on a bike like this, but the dainty little Spurcycle bell the dealer put on had no effect on our oblivious pedestrians. This one's a good bit louder at 1/3 the price, and the lever position's adjustable. We'll see.
 
Last edited:
Allan47.7339 said:
Usually the Spurcycle is louder if installed correctly. It's easy to over tighten and mute the sound. It was designed to have a noticeable tone.
Click to expand...
Interesting. The Spurcycle I returned rang a long time at a high frequency with a slight beat — no sign of damping by overtightening at least. The tone is certainly distinctive, but not one pedestrian of maybe 20 encountered so far showed any sign of hearing it till I was under 10 ft away.

The ROCKBROS bell on my other bike does way better than that. Better ergonomics, too, but that model's no longer available.

The Incredibell XT is roughly as loud as the ROCKBROS, and I like its ergonomics, too. The Spurcycle weighed almost as much. Effectiveness to be determined.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Moving from Vado SL EQ to Creo 2
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
AvalancheRun
AvalancheRun
C
Turbo Vado SL 5.0 EQ
Replies
8
Views
2K
Jeremy McCreary
Jeremy McCreary
J
2022 vado sl 5.0 chainring
Replies
11
Views
1K
jason.flood
J
H
Vado SL 5.0 EQ Handlebar Bag Storage
Replies
1
Views
1K
Te. S
Te. S
D
Vado 5.0 IGH versus Tero 5.0 (EQ pack)
5 6 7
Replies
134
Views
13K
Ben J
Ben J
Back