Now I get why people change the cassette

so as the bike came stock, did you wear/destroy the 11t cog really quickly?

i agree that it seems like the gearing on many of these bikes is inappropriate, high-power mid-drive or not. the lowest couple gears on a bike are not for accelerating from a stop - they're for going up really steep hills! most cyclists don't touch those gears at all in day to day use on flat roads. similarly the highest are for steady state cruising at high speed. but the idea of adjusting the gearing so that you never use one of the gears does seem very odd. serious/professional cyclists put 500-1000w through their 11t and 10t cogs all the time and as long as they don't shift while doing so, they last just fine. i'm guessing if someone started out in the 15-17-19-21 range, got to 10-15mph, shifted properly into the 11 (meaning not while under full load!) and then stayed there for riding at 20+mph (which is what such a small cog is designed for) they'd last a long time.
OK, let's back up a bit. When you've put enough miles on your cartridge/cassette for it to be due for replacement (at 1000 miles, or 10,000 miles, whenever), which gear goes first? How does that 11t look when compared to the gears with more teeth? Why is that?

Now, all else being equal, let's say you don't need that 11t as often.
 
I agree. The level of PAS selected is about how much assistance you're seeking. No clue what you are thinking of. If you have something to say, stop playing games and say it!
If you can't keep up with the motor, then it is the main source of power. Is that really biking or is it more of a moped set up?
Higher PAS doesn't necessarily mean higher motor power output. It can mean maintaining a higher cadence/rpm but the current can actually be lower as your probably on a flat and in a lower resistance situation.
I often use the same if not less power in the higher PAS as I use the lower for hill climbing (similar to my gears) and the upper are for speed.
 
Its worth noting that on a hub drive, the gear selection is entirely irrelevant to the motor output. Hub motors power the bike from the axle. The drivetrain is there to make the rider feel useful only. Take the chain physically off of a hub bike drive and then climb on and pedal it. PAS will work just fine. This is why drivetrains are so much less robust on a manufactured hub ebike, generally (garbage cranksets in particular). They aren't needed unless the rider is trying to work hard and even then, the hub motor is easing the burden on the chain.
Please supply a list of bikes that have a programmable controller able to change what you are talking about. Maybe just a couple? One?
All of the Sondors bikes have them since Sondors went away from KT controllers several years ago. There is a PAS settings section where you choose what percentage of the available amps gets sent at 1, then at 2 and so on. The factory settings on those bikes are notoriously heavy handed (just like the Bafang mid drives) and users complaining about the bikes running away from them get sent to this section in the manual pretty regularly. KT controllers have a very limited but still effective C5 setting where you can give less amps to the motor (i.e. pull out its teeth) as well as a separate slow start setting that eliminates the jerky start, at least. And on those as well there is a setting that increases or decreases the increment of PAS from one level to the next higher one (its default is 'no effect').

This is a Box 3, 9-sp, 11-47 in the thumbnail. The ring is 42 on this one with 90Nm. The 9 chain is much wider than an 11 for more robust usage but with a similar gear range. E-11 chains are super expensive and cause focused pressure like being stepped on by a stiletto heal.
In the high power DIY builder world, standard advice is that the 11S chains are stronger. Experience over time pretty much proves this out as 11s systems seem to hold up just great under just about everything. I believe the reason for this is that the chain pins are a bit shorter and provide a little less leverage for bad behavior like dumbass shifting technique to spread the side plates and break the chain. However thats just a guess.

I love my two 11s BBSHD systems. But after building several 9s, then the two 11s, I have switched back to 9s simply because there are great 9s choices out there that are more reasonably priced. That $47 chain is a great example. I use two 11s chains on my longtail cargo bike (thankfully I held out and found them on sale for about $25 and stocked up before the pandemic). So I need 1.5 of them on the bike and of course a smart hi-po mid drive builder carries a spare that means I need a total of three of the damn things for that bike.
 
so as the bike came stock, did you wear/destroy the 11t cog really quickly?
Yes thats the way it works on a higher powered mid drive. With bad riding technique you can expect them to die in a few hundred miles. I got one to last 1500 before I cracked it (and that was a 2wd bike on flat land where I left it in 11 and never downshifted, even at stoplights... a special case). On the flip side of that, its only a $7 replacement part.

BUT the point being made about staying off of it entirely is well made. There is the one technique where you re-order the cogs, and another where you lock out the 11 via the derailleur travel screw.

On my Stormtrooper I did a from-stop throttle test, and found the 11T gear got me to about 33 mph after a full city block, and it barely got there by the end of that block. The next test: 13T gear got me to about 30-31... but MUCH sooner. The motor wasn't bogged. The third test ran on the third cog in: 15T. That got me to 28 mph faster still before topping out, and I could then shift if I cared to to squeeze out that last 1 mph. So the test confirmed the stock advice typically given to stay off the 11T cog, because it doesn't give much benefit and has plenty of costs. Staying off the 11 also keeps the chain better aligned, oftentimes as well.

People hear about 1500w+ mids and think they are motorcycle motors but the truth is the numbers comparison makes them seem far more powerful than they actually are in practice. You can't get more out of them on that 11 (anything that matters, at least) and you are bogged down getting up there.
 
If you can't keep up with the motor, then it is the main source of power. Is that really biking or is it more of a moped set up?
Higher PAS doesn't necessarily mean higher motor power output. It can mean maintaining a higher cadence/rpm but the current can actually be lower as your probably on a flat and in a lower resistance situation.
I often use the same if not less power in the higher PAS as I use the lower for hill climbing (similar to my gears) and the upper are for speed.
Didn't say that, or didn't intend to if that's the way you took it. What I was talking about was the scenario, regardless of PAS level, where you can't keep up with the pedals/go any faster, because of the gearing. Imagine YOUR bike if you didn't have a gear/gears available that would allow you to pedal faster than 15mph. Would that have ANYTHING to do with PAS level?
 
All of the Sondors bikes have them since Sondors went away from KT controllers several years ago. There is a PAS settings section where you choose what percentage of the available amps gets sent at 1, then at 2 and so on. The factory settings on those bikes are notoriously heavy handed (just like the Bafang mid drives) and users complaining about the bikes running away from them get sent to this section in the manual pretty regularly. KT controllers have a very limited but still effective C5 setting where you can give less amps to the motor (i.e. pull out its teeth) as well as a separate slow start setting that eliminates the jerky start, at least. And on those as well there is a setting that increases or decreases the increment of PAS from one level to the next higher one (its default is 'no effect').
Interesting! Didn't know that, thank you! So the Sonders controllers mimic the KT? Do they allow for power based PAS settings (vs. the more common speed based)? I'll have to dig into an owners manual I suppose, to see what's going on there.

For me anyway, having been totally spoiled by KT, that sheds an entirely different light on the Sonders line up... -Al
 
I don't get why people don't shift.
I do. "Normal people" don't trust derailleurs. People who don't know how it works, certainly don't know how to adjust or maintain it, likely have never once ridden a properly set up bike since they buy Schwinn's and Huffy's at Wally World, and "every time" they try to use it the chain falls off...

Not actually "every time" but that's what it feels like for them. Perception is the layman's reality.

It's the real reason we have dork disks, and I'm a bit surprised we don't have them on the other side. Because normal people don't inspect to see if their derailleur is bent. Normal people don't know how to adjust the limit screws much less even know there are screws you can adjust. The limit screws being why the dork disk should be a pointless redundancy.

Many normal people don't even have a proper place to store their bikes, tying them up to porches, random trees, or in some cases even just throwing them on the ground. Then they wonder why they don't shift properly.

And normal people sure as shine-ola don't maintain their drivetrain. If they do anything at all, they just layer more random off the shelf lubes (often incompatible ones) atop the existing gunk when it feels like the chain is binding. I know 40 years ago as a pre-teen that's about all I ever did with my bikes.

Thus lacking the knowledge to maintain them the derailleur has the public perception of being an unreliable untrustworthy steaming dung-heap. That perception -- true or not -- makes those "normal people" AFRAID to even try and shift. So they get it into the highest gear that they can start from a dead stop with and maybe make it up a hill, and leave it there.
I know I had my own trust issues with the technology because the last time I rode a bike with a derailleur was in my late 20's, and, my "college engineering background" had me thinking the mechanism itself was batshit crazy, It was a hand-me-down bike I couldn't afford to properly have serviced, we had no internet videos explaining how to adjust the screws So I did what any sane and rational person would once I had the money...

And returned to my teen years and got another bike with an internal gear hub and rode it for twelve years only needing to service the rear-end once. Because I was an early adopter of chain waxing. A practice that should be done at the factory -- and would if that wouldn't put the entire bike lube industry out of business.

The tech certainly has improved since I last dicked with it. I was really impressed with how smooth and easy shifting was on the 1x7 of the two Nakto's I burnt through back-to-back and had to return for refund. My Aventure wasn't as nice out of the box, but now that I've gone to 53:11-36 and properly set all the adjustments, It seems as nice as my internal hub bikes ever were. Right up until the front tire picks up a branch off the trail and whacks it into my foot and derailleur throwing both out of whack ... AGAIN...

It's a cheap industry standard solution that's high maintenance. When we have people who don't even realize you have to change the oil or top off the coolant in cars, you really think normal people are going to have bikes with derailleurs that work right with properly lubed chains?

The "normal person" who doesn't shift out of fear of dropping the chain typically has nobody to blame but themselves, or whoever set up and/or is responsible for maintaining the bike. More often than not they think they can grab a $100 Walmart special, hop on it and go, and they don't want anything more complex than that.

Especially if their "LBS" is filled with snooty effete elitists who look down their nose at anyone not already well versed in every detail of the technology... or worse just look at every customer like a mark. Which basically describes the bike shops in my county, the nearest decent one being over the hill in Vermont. Well, that's not entirely fair, there is one that seems well meaning, but they just don't seem to know what they're doing or how to talk to customers.

Hell it's why I learned bike tech 20 years ago, and am bringing myself back up to speed today. And why I have to choke back vomiting up strings of interjections and expletives every time some privileged rich ass says "just go to your LBS".
 
If you can't keep up with the motor, then it is the main source of power. Is that really biking or is it more of a moped set up?
Higher PAS doesn't necessarily mean higher motor power output. It can mean maintaining a higher cadence/rpm but the current can actually be lower as your probably on a flat and in a lower resistance situation.
I often use the same if not less power in the higher PAS as I use the lower for hill climbing (similar to my gears) and the upper are for speed.
"If you can't keep up with the motor, then it is the main source of power. Is that really biking or is it more of a moped set up?" - One of the best quotes on this thread. So true. I keep telling non enthusiasts that an ebike is not the same idea as a scooter or motorbike :)
 
What business is it of anyone how anyone else rides? Live and let live.

Let people ride how they want. Its either that or they stay in their automobiles.
I'm not saying that at all... To each their own and enjoy.
Where did I imply that anyone shouldn't ride what they prefer? I just said that it's not for me as I have no interest in ghost pedaling as my only option. I did say that it is a different experience and some bikes are set up to work more like a moped then a motorized pedal assisted bicycle. If you read the OP, it seems that's how his bike is and he's not particularly enthusiastic about it either.
Perhaps reading the entire thread and taking statements in context will allow for an easier dismount from the high horse.
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying that at all... To each their own and enjoy.
Where did I imply that anyone shouldn't ride what they prefer? I just said that it's not for me as I have no interest in ghost pedaling as my only option. I did say that it is a different experience and some bikes are set up to work more like a moped then a motorized pedal assisted bicycle. If you read the OP, it seems that's how his bike is and he's not particularly enthusiastic about it either.
I did go back to the OP's first post, and that's not what I'm reading at all. He's saying the lower gears are useless, and he's riding using only his top 3 gears. Put yourself in his shoes! Are you factoring in the fact he's on a bike with 20" wheels?

What would YOU do if your bike was only good for 15mph because you can't pedal fast enough to go any faster?? That you were able to ride using just the top 3 gears? Turn the power down? Is that your solution? My bet is he could do the same with his motor turned off....
 
Last edited:
I did go back to the OP's first post, and that's not what I'm seeing at all. He's saying the lower gears are useless, and he's riding using only his top 3 gears. Put yourself in his shoes! Are you factoring in the fact he's on a bike with 20" wheels?

What would YOU do if your bike was only good for 15mph because you can't pedal fast enough to go any faster?? That you were able to ride using just the top 3 gears? Turn the power down? Is that your solution?
Another person who needs a step stool. These mopeds are poorly designed if they have unusable gears and low top speeds
Done. Pediod.
My solution...Learn and move on to a better design if it doesn't suit your needs.
 
Another person who needs a step stool. These mopeds are poorly designed if they have unusable gears and low top speeds
Done. Pediod.
My solution...Learn and move on to a better design if it doesn't suit your needs.
I'm disappointed. You're better and smarter than this.....
 
I'm disappointed. You're better and smarter than this.....
Why... Changing cassettes and chain rings in my opinion is throwing good money after bad and isn't the best solution if you are looking to pedal input.
These units are built with bike components but in reality are more pedal initiated throttle mopeds in use.
 
Perhaps reading the entire thread and taking statements in context will allow for an easier dismount from the high horse.
I did. And you came off as being snotty/snobby in a way that is sadly all too common in cycling. But usually its an analog cyclist looking down their nose at an ebiker. Here we have one flavor of ebiker pooping on others. As a community we need less of this and more recognizance of the overall goal and how we are either moving towards it ... or fighting against it.
 
Why... Changing cassettes and chain rings in my opinion is throwing good money after bad and isn't the best solution if you are looking to pedal input.
These units are built with bike components but in reality are more pedal initiated throttle mopeds in use.
In that case I'd say you've never ridden one with a drivetrain set up for you properly. The very notion that the off the shelf gearing can be "one size fits all" is absurd, and because most of these bikes seem to be geared as if they aren't e-bikes, it's one of the first changes I planned on making before I even bought it.

Just as I would with most any off the shelf bike. Off the shelf they're good enough to get you from point A to point B, but it's not going to perfectly use the maximum capability of rider or bike unless you happen to be that "magic medium". We're not all the same height, strength, body shape, age, or any other meaningful metric by which a bike should be sized... and seat-post and bar-angle alone often just don't cut it.

That's the flaw of averages. "One size fits all fits nobody".

EXCELLENT book on the topic, highly recommend:

ANY bike motorized or no can be made more pleasant through setting up the chainring(s) and cassette to better match the rider. This seems even more true on 1x -- where you only have one front ring.

It doesn't help that most of these bikes -- from my limited experience at least -- irregardless of price aren't geared to be e-bikes. That "off the shelf parts" seems to take what would be a good for a similarly sized fat bike, and not something with power assist where on the high end there's more room to "push". It's even worse when pedaling and all your resistance "goes away" as the bike races out from underneath you. That's not that it's "designed to be a moped" that's because 'tis mis-geared for the rider!

Thus the first thing I did with mine was up to a 53 tooth front (from the 44 Aventon said was a 46). And why I just swapped the rear from the stock 12..32 to 11:36 which seems just right for me.

newCassette.jpg


And it's not like it was expensive compared to the bike itself. Especially if you're gonna swap to better cranks like I did (130mm aluminum). $20 chainring, $25 cassette, couple $10 chains, maybe $30 in cheap tools you should have anyways (crank puller, cassette tool, chain tools)

This is where even the crappy "cheap" bikes can be dialed in just as good as any of them, and even the expensive ones need tweaking. And where it must be nice to have a LBS capable / competent enough for that... instead of having the nearest one you'd trust being one state over like myself.

It's like dialing in the seat and bars. Not everyone is built for the lean-forward ass in the air crotch-rocket ride that the butt floss seats are designed for. The moment you go cruiser bars and an upright position, you need the wider seat. Meanwhile the farther forward you lean, the better a thin seat is. But nobody seems to be applying that logic, unable to figure out why if riding upright your tailbone hurts on the thin seats, or if riding with half your mass over the bars a "comfort" seat makes your thighs hurt. Basic geometry.

I'm by no means a bike expert, but even I recognize that you're going to need to hem those pants when you're a 40w:28 and the shortest length they sell at that waist size is a 34 inseam. It's that or run around wearing sweatpants all the time.
 
Last edited:
In that case I'd say you've never ridden one with a drivetrain set up for you properly. The very notion that the off the shelf gearing can be "one size fits all" is absurd, and because most of these bikes seem to be geared as if they aren't e-bikes, it's one of the first changes I planned on making before I even bought it.

Just as I would with most any off the shelf bike. Off the shelf they're good enough to get you from point A to point B, but it's not going to perfectly use the maximum capability of rider or bike unless you happen to be that "magic medium".

That's the flaw of averages. "One size fits all fits nobody".

EXCELLENT book on the topic, highly recommend:

ANY bike motorized or no can be made more pleasant through setting up the chainring(s) and cassette to better match the rider. This seems even more true on 1x -- where you only have one front ring.

It doesn't help that most of these bikes -- from my limited experience at least -- irregardless of price aren't geared to be e-bikes. That "off the shelf parts" seems to take what would be a good for a similarly sized fat bike, and not something with power assist where on the high end there's more room to "push".

Thus the first thing I did with mine was up to a 53 tooth front (from the 44 Aventon said was a 46). And why I just swapped the rear from the stock 12..32 to 11:36 which seems just right for me.

And it's not like it was expensive compared to the bike itself. Especially if you're gonna swap to better cranks like I did (130mm aluminum). $20 chainring, $25 cassette, couple $10 chains, maybe $30 in cheap tools you should have anyways (crank puller, cassette tool, chain tools)
When you're dealing with $1000 bikes and up, this is where even the crappy "cheap" bikes can be dialed in just as good, and even the expensive ones need tweaking. And where it must be nice to have a LBS capable / competent enough for that... instead of having the nearest one you'd trust being one state over.

It's like dialing in the seat and bars. Not everyone is built for the lean-forward ass in the air crotch-rocket ride that the butt floss seats are designed for. The moment you go cruiser bars and an upright position, you need the wider seat.

Meanwhile the farther forward you lean, the better a thin seat is. But nobody seems to be applying that logic, unable to figure out why if riding upright your tailbone hurts on the thin seats, or if riding with half your mass over the bars a "comfort" seat makes your thighs hurt. Basic geometry.

I'm by no means a bike expert, but even I recognize that you're going to need to hem those pants when you're a 40w:28 and the shortest length they sell at that waist size is a 34 inseam. It's that or run around wearing sweatpants all the time.
You should read more and write less.
I never said that you can't improve upon by changing the gearing.
But the more substantial improvement can be made with proper tuning though programming.
And that does not require 10 paragraphs
 
You should read more and write less.
I never said that you can't improve upon by changing the gearing.
Given the attitude you were throwing that didn't seem like the case. But that's a problem with the web, figuring out what tone anyone is using.

But the more substantial improvement can be made with proper tuning though programming.
Why neuter the output when you could just better leverage it? You're LITERALLY talking about turning it down instead of finding a way to better use it. People don't but 750watt or stronger bikes to make them behave like 250 watt ones.

And that does not require 10 paragraphs
Ah yes, the twitter-generation "aah wall of text' garbage I have no stomach for. I kind of miss the days when people used to complain that a 16k post limit size on forums was "too small". Now you give the average half-tweet fool 288 characters and their cup doth runneth over.

Kind of goes hand in hand with how everyone these days seem to expect us all to be magically psychic deciphering half-meanings and incomplete information.
 
Why neuter the output when you could just better leverage it? You're LITERALLY talking about turning it down instead of finding a way to better use it. People don't but 750watt or stronger bikes to make them behave like 250 watt ones.


your point is as absurd as asking why buy a 500 (or for that matter 100 or 200) horsepower car if you ever want to drive slow? because you don’t need all that power (or even a tiny fraction of it) all the time. same with an e-bike.

proper programming allows you to moderate the relative amounts of motor input and pedal input at various speeds, cadences, pedal pressure (in case of torque sensor) or throttle levels. gearing alone may allow you to contribute power at a lower cadence, which is great if that’s your style, but it does not solve the larger problem for many riding circumstances.
 
your point is as absurd as asking why buy a 500 (or for that matter 100 or 200) horsepower car if you ever want to drive slow? because you don’t need all that power (or even a tiny fraction of it) all the time. same with an e-bike.
Oddly that's the argument I'd use for dialing in your gear ratios. You don't put a tow truck transmission on a race car, or a track transmission on a pickup truck. Or a street car transmission on a Semi. Even when all those vehicles have the same horsepower engine.
We have gears for a reason, matching those gear ratios is important as power will go unused, and you'll waste power.

If I'm in PAS 2 (out of five) doing 10mph, and it's impossible in the highest gear to pedal fast enough to keep up with the motor -- aka what my Aventure did out of the box -- turning down the assist isn't the answer. What is that going to do if I'm already going the speed of the assist level? Especially on bikes like mine where the assist levels just changes the speed at which the motor gets turned off and has not a single blasted thing to do with the amount of power delivered. That's entirely down to the cadence sensor.

Changing the gearing upwards so you're pedaling slower reporting a slower cadence lowers the power output from the motor. Thus you get more "you" and more efficient use of power at lower speeds.

Which is why when you say:

proper programming allows you to moderate the relative amounts of motor input and pedal input at various speeds, cadences, pedal pressure (in case of torque sensor) or throttle levels. gearing alone may allow you to contribute power at a lower cadence, which is great if that’s your style, but it does not solve the larger problem for many riding circumstances.
That's all fine and dandy when you have access to that. As I said in another thread that isn't even an option on many e-bikes, including my Aventure There is no "programming" other than turning the top speed limiter up and down. The closed nature of the controller means we don't have those tools.

Just as the assist levels only set the speed cutoff for the motor, not the power delivered. Thus for a lot of us not only is changing the gearing the more sensible answer, it's the only fix available to us.

And again it's something I would do on ANY bike, even the non-motorized if I was riding it seriously for any amount of time. I dunno about you, but for me stock gearings universally suck. These goofy tiny little huffing chainrings and narrow cassette ranges more meant for a 3x than a 1x...

It's actually funny, it seems a lot of the $1800 to $2400 bikes lack that level of controller access, when the sub $1000 makes -- nakto, velowave, etm. -- using the "cheap" controllers and displays do.
 
Back