New motor: Made in Canada, 2022 Mid-drive system

[Deafcat]

Ken, we've had no issues at all with chain lube slinging onto the disk rotor. We only use Motul C2 lube, which is a very tacky lube which will never sling off the chain.

Likely we'll be testing other moto chain lubes for compatibility, to broaden our recommendations there.

 

[Ken M]

Ken, we've had no issues at all with chain lube slinging onto the disk rotor. We only use Motul C2 lube, which is a very tacky lube which will never sling off the chain.

Likely we'll be testing other moto chain lubes for compatibility, to broaden our recommendations there.

Sounds good. I totally believe you but humans are the problem. I've seen people take out a can of WD40 or other spray oil and just soak a chain with it...as soon as they start riding it's slinging everywhere and they remain clueless. I would even agree that Darwin is just chiming in when these people can't stop and go right into the back of a truck but something that lawyers love to create litigation income from. Lawyers really don't consider facts or true fault...they just seek litigation.

I do understand that going with a chain was an easier path to get to market faster than going belt from day one. I have an Izip Express with a belt on the left side with no disk brake. If you can develop a good progressive regen method on the motor side then just eliminate the disk brake and use the motor as the rear brake (I proposed this question to the CPSC to cover the rear brake requirement and it was approved in the US anyway so long as the total braking performance requirements were met). I'm just happy to see someone kind of mimicking that configuration and I'd like to even join in with you guys to help promote in the US if you need assistance.

Believe me when I say I love your idea and wish I had thought of it. I'm 100% with you that the only way to optimize the drive system for a motor and a rider is to separate them. Clearly from the forum comments very few people seem to understand this (they think because a 250W motor can climb well at 5mph that current mid drives must be truly optimized).

I even like that you made PAS an optional upgrade so those that have to have it pay the extra cost so throttle lovers like me don't have to pay for it on a mid-drive bike. I think 50% of more that say they prefer PAS would not really want it if they knew how much cost it adds (purely speculative but you may have real world data from your efforts).

 

[bexamous]

I think 50% of more that say they prefer PAS would not really want it if they knew how much cost it adds (purely speculative but you may have real world data from your efforts).

bafang ultra torque sensor / Bafang M620 torque sensor with axle for replacement - Greenbikekit.com BBS, ebike batteries, Bafang M620, Bafang M600, Bafang M500, Bafang M510, KT controller with display-GreenBikeKit.com

bafang ultra torque sensor / Bafang Ultra M620 torque sensor with axle for replacement.

www.greenbikekit.com

Probably half that? Software is pretty much free... I mean VESC already has support.

 

[AHicks]

I even like that you made PAS an optional upgrade so those that have to have it pay the extra cost so throttle lovers like me don't have to pay for it on a mid-drive bike. I think 50% of more that say they prefer PAS would not really want it if they knew how much cost it adds (purely speculative but you may have real world data from your efforts).

FYI, popular PAS sensors are generally less than 20 bucks....

 

[Deafcat]

FYI, popular PAS sensors are generally less than 20 bucks....

Sure, but we won't bother with cheap "plastic magnet ring" cadence PAS on a bike like this. We've all ridden that sort of thing, and ridden real torque-cadence PAS systems, and know it's worth it to do it right.

 

[m@Robertson]

Sure, but we won't bother with cheap "plastic magnet ring" cadence PAS on a bike like this. We've all ridden that sort of thing, and ridden real torque-cadence PAS systems, and know it's worth it to do it right.

Not necessarily.

I Hate Ebike Torque-Sensing (maybe you should too)

Well, I don’t actually hate it, but it is a technology rooted in cycling’s past, whose existence was created to market a product to legacy riders.

talesontwowheels.com

I wrote the above before I got into proper cargo biking. It turns out that rather being alone in the above attitude against torque sensing, I found it is particularly unpopular with the cargo bike crowd, and for good reason. Who in their right mind wants a system that forces effort when you are riding a 2-wheel freight train? There's plenty of effort going into the job already as it is.

 

[Deafcat]

Yea, not all torque-sensor based implementations are great for general riding (or cargo, yea that seems like a bad idea).

I've ridden at least six different embodiments of torque and/or cadence PAS, my favorite to this day is Ultra motor "Sport" mode, which is the closest thing to what we've developed.

Think "subtle precision of torque sensor" combined with "sporty go-time" of cadence sensor. With a throttle on the side, of course (we'll always offer that option alongside the PAS)

 

[scrambler]

There are different riding styles and riding conditions that require different blends of PAS.
You need to have at least presets for the two main ones (Regular cruising, and uneven terrain MTB riding), and offer customizability so that riders can tune based on their preferences and abilities.

 

[AHicks]

Yea, not all torque-sensor based implementations are great for general riding (or cargo, yea that seems like a bad idea).

I've ridden at least six different embodiments of torque and/or cadence PAS, my favorite to this day is Ultra motor "Sport" mode, which is the closest thing to what we've developed.

Think "subtle precision of torque sensor" combined with "sporty go-time" of cadence sensor. With a throttle on the side, of course (we'll always offer that option alongside the PAS)

Agreed, a properly set up Ultra is going to be tough to beat. Just keep in mind that your "perfect setup" may not be acceptable to all. They need to be tunable by the end user so that different priorities can be taken into account!!!!!

 

[AHicks]

Sure, but we won't bother with cheap "plastic magnet ring" cadence PAS on a bike like this. We've all ridden that sort of thing, and ridden real torque-cadence PAS systems, and know it's worth it to do it right.

Those "cheap plastic magnet rings" work just fine on about anything. It's the controller programming that's absolute junk in most that don't work right. Get that programming right, and about any PAS sensor will work just fine. You just don't need anything real exotic to serve that purpose....

Point being, let's put the blame for crappy cadence only based PAS performance where it belongs.....the controller programming

 

[Ken M]

Those "cheap plastic magnet rings" work just fine on about anything. It's the controller programming that's absolute junk in most that don't work right. Get that programming right, and about any PAS sensor will work just fine. You just don't need anything real exotic to serve that purpose....

Point being, let's put the blame for crappy cadence only based PAS performance where it belongs.....the controller programming

Is there a cadence-based PAS that is not just an on/off switch for assist per the mode setting like level 1 = 200W, Level 2 - 300W, etc. I have not ridden one that actually provides varied assist based on the crank RPM except for the Izip Express which actually used a small motor as a generator to feed the controller.

I'm pretty sure most good crank axle torque sensors are pretty expensive. I know there are a couple other methods but they seem dubious to me (a sensor on a chain stay to measure torque seems very ???? but I think Stromer does this.

Don't want any program between me and the assist - I just want a nice smooth linear throttle. I still pedal just like I'm on a torque-based PAS but I like full control of the assist provided by the drive system (most programmers think they have perfected their program but that's their ego talking).

 

[Ken M]

There are different riding styles and riding conditions that require different blends of PAS.
You need to have at least presets for the two main ones (Regular cruising, and uneven terrain MTB riding), and offer customizability so that riders can tune based on their preferences and abilities.

Wow. Given the average rider access to the assist programming. Most people don't know how to use a screw driver which is why Bosch, Brose, Yamaha, etc. would never consider this.

 

[bexamous]

big brands and they don't even provide a throttle because they think their programmers are better than the rider's brain

Big brands care more about laws.

Most people don't know how to use a screw driver which is why Bosch, Brose, Yamaha, etc. would never consider this.

They also would never consider a throttle.

 

[Ken M]

Big brands care more about laws.

The biggest brand (Bosch - who is really a much bigger car parts producer) wrote the legislation to keep ebikes recreational.

Big brands want to sell the same neutered ebikes they sell in Europe here. That's one of the reason they provided $millions to People for Bikes to promote the nutty 3-class legislation ignoring that we had a great simple federal definition of a "low speed electric bicycle" in federal law HR727 since 2002 that just defined them as subclass of bicycle (so states could just use their existing bike "use" laws for compliant LSEBs).

If / when the big brands start loosing market share because they don't have throttles they will add them. Eventually they will allow throttle ebikes in EU because they need to focus on getting more people out of cars and less on worrying about trail managers that think throttle ebikes move more grains of sand on their trails.

I continue over and over again being critical of the effort done by People for Bikes but never does a representative with them ever chime in to defend the 3-class legislation. Interesting I think.

 

[AHicks]

Is there a cadence-based PAS that is not just an on/off switch for assist per the mode setting like level 1 = 200W, Level 2 - 300W, etc. I have not ridden one that actually provides varied assist based on the crank RPM except for the Izip Express which actually used a small motor as a generator to feed the controller.

I'm pretty sure most good crank axle torque sensors are pretty expensive. I know there are a couple other methods but they seem dubious to me (a sensor on a chain stay to measure torque seems very ???? but I think Stromer does this.

Don't want any program between me and the assist - I just want a nice smooth linear throttle. I still pedal just like I'm on a torque-based PAS but I like full control of the assist provided by the drive system (most programmers think they have perfected their program but that's their ego talking).

A PAS sensor supplies the controller with a pulse every time a magnet passes the sensor. That's it. That's all ANY of them do. Makes no difference what system we're talking about or what it cost.

From there, how the controller uses that signal from the sensor is all over the ball park. For instance, those with big delays prior to allowing power to the motor, as in the case where the crank has to turn 1/2 to a full turn prior to the motor getting power, the controller is sitting there counting pulses until it gets to the predefined (programmed) number, where it turns the power on. This is because the controller has been programmed to count too high a number of pulses! A better controller might allow the rider to set that number of pulses required to their own preference.....

There's a LOT more to the controller programming. MANY more variables in play, especially when considering the complexity of a GOOD controller. The PAS sensor is just the tip of the iceberg and gets a lot of undeserved flack for those not really understanding it's function....

"most programmers think they have perfected their program but that's their ego talking"

Couldn't possibly agree more. They're totally failing to understand (care?) that not all riders have the same priorities. Likely believe that their priorities are the only ones that have any relevance (know anyone like that?). That becomes a big deal when it comes to something like the Ultra motors, or even the BBSxx motors, that are so refined in their programming abilities - with the UART versions able to be customized so many ways. -Al

 

[Ken M]

A PAS sensor supplies the controller with a pulse every time a magnet passes the sensor. That's it. That's all ANY of them do.

A torque sensor is a PAS sensor and at least that signal is used as a variable control for assist and not just an on/off switch like a cadence only based system. I think one of the things that bothers me the most is that People for Bikes considers all PAS ebikes as being the same thing. Then their 3-class system isolates a throttle-assist as something different because the EU didn't allow them and a few trail managers consider them the same as a motorcycle (not a lot of synapses being used). When you call your organization a bike advocacy group maybe you should know a little bit about ebikes before taking lobby money to promote bad legislation. The sad thing is that so many ebike riders never take the time to think about this legislation that impacts them and they just drink the koolaid that it's a good system.

Power is what limits bike speeds and that is what should be utilized to limit how an assist system performs. That is exactly what the LSEB definition in federal law HR727 did and People for Bikes didn't understand it. It allowed a 750W "rating" below 20mph and then limited power above 20mph (per the constraints of 170lb rider on level surface) so an ebike remained in the realm of traditional bike speeds. It was an elegant way to control speed while not requiring the assist cut-offs that no one really likes.

Again, why doesn't anyone working at People for Bikes ever engage in a discussion on this forum about their promoted legislation. The reason...they know it's bad.

 

[AHicks]

A torque sensor is a PAS sensor and at least that signal is used as a variable control for assist and not just an on/off switch like a cadence only based system. I think one of the things that bothers me the most is that People for Bikes considers all PAS ebikes as being the same thing. Then their 3-class system isolates a throttle-assist as something different because the EU didn't allow them and a few trail managers consider them the same as a motorcycle (not a lot of synapses being used). When you call your organization a bike advocacy group maybe you should know a little bit about ebikes before taking lobby money to promote bad legislation. The sad thing is that so many ebike riders never take the time to think about this legislation that impacts them and they just drink the koolaid that it's a good system.

Power is what limits bike speeds and that is what should be utilized to limit how an assist system performs. That is exactly what the LSEB definition in federal law HR727 did and People for Bikes didn't understand it. It allowed a 750W "rating" below 20mph and then limited power above 20mph (per the constraints of 170lb rider on level surface) so an ebike remained in the realm of traditional bike speeds. It was an elegant way to control speed while not requiring the assist cut-offs that no one really likes.

Again, why doesn't anyone working at People for Bikes ever engage in a discussion on this forum about their promoted legislation. The reason...they know it's bad.

I would respectfully disagree. EVERY bike has a PAS sensor, including those with a torque sensor. You can't say every bike has a torque sensor. Bikes with and without torque sensors are generally worlds apart when it comes to controller programming.

3 class system and related legislation is irrelevant to this conversation.

 

[Gionnirocket]

Is there a cadence-based PAS that is not just an on/off switch for assist per the mode setting like level 1 = 200W, Level 2 - 300W, etc. I have not ridden one that actually provides varied assist based on the crank RPM except for the Izip Express which actually used a small motor as a generator to feed the controller.

I'm pretty sure most good crank axle torque sensors are pretty expensive. I know there are a couple other methods but they seem dubious to me (a sensor on a chain stay to measure torque seems very ???? but I think Stromer does this.

Don't want any program between me and the assist - I just want a nice smooth linear throttle. I still pedal just like I'm on a torque-based PAS but I like full control of the assist provided by the drive system (most programmers think they have perfected their program but that's their ego talking).

Yes the Bafang BBS* provides varied assistance depending on how far below the set cadence you are pedaling.
If I set PAS 1 to be 30% of motor rpm... Depending on how far below that, that I am in my pedaling it will provide a varied amount of current until I reach the desired cadence. The further below motor speed, the more current until shutting off at 30%

 

[Ken M]

I would respectfully disagree. EVERY bike has a PAS sensor, including those with a torque sensor. You can't say every bike has a torque sensor. Bikes with and without torque sensors are generally worlds apart when it comes to controller programming.

3 class system and related legislation is irrelevant to this conversation.

No, every ebike does not have a PAS sensor as you just claimed. There are ebikes with throttle-assist only (no PAS sensors).

I know there are ebikes with torque sensors which are obviously the more advance PAS as they vary the assist prioritized by the effort level of the rider.

I understand the feedback that the 3-class legislation is not really relevant to this discussion but it gets people thinking about that poor legislation and I'm hoping it's fixed someday.

 

[Ken M]

Yes the Bafang BBS* provides varied assistance depending on how far below the set cadence you are pedaling.
If I set PAS 1 to be 30% of motor rpm... Depending on how far below that, that I am in my pedaling it will provide a varied amount of current until I reach the desired cadence. The further below motor speed, the more current until shutting off at 30%

Sounds like a bike you could just ghost pedal in 1st gear given that assist level is only dependent on cadence. That is very much how my Izip Espress performs but it has a small generator at the crank that provides a variable voltage to the controller to substitute for throttle input to the controller.

My main point here is to illustrate there is a large variety of systems that are classified a PAS that could be just considered a variation of throttle-assist.