Opinion: AM1000 V6 vs Ultra CC Fat?

[taserface]

I think I could use some help/feedback.

I am currently shopping to upgrade my old BBSHD bike (KHS 680+, 27.5"x3") and currently, the Voyager ULTRA AM1000 V6 and Liberty Ultra CC FAT have worked their way to the top of my list... but while quite different, I'm finding myself toggling back and forth between the two and analysis paralysis is starting to set in...

AM1000 mullet tire config/geometry?
First... the whole mullet tire thing (new to me). The AM1000 offers both mullet (29/27.5) or 27.5 (x2) config. I am assuming the geometry is only optimized for the mullet config: "the wheelset adopts the now more popular 29/27.5” wheelset instead of the previous 27.5/27.5” (per description page). Is that assumption correct or does anyone know if they have mutators in place to allow switching back and forth while maintaining optimal geometry? (or have 2 different frames, depending on wheel setup... doesn't seem likely) Also, does anyone have experience with this bike or a similar mullet setup in an eMTB/MTB? I am wondering how the 29/27.5 mix behaves in non-downhill settings? (flat trails/road, uphill on roads, etc). Any cons?

Aside from the mullet thing, I am trying to figure out which is a better fit for me in general.

My preferences + use cases:
I want a good bike that has good range, good power, that's a good value and can do a little bit of everything (just like everyone else?).

15% of the time: a bit of everything (fun trails in the area (nothing overly technical/aggressive/challenging), cruising around on local streets, etc)

85% of the time: daily (work) commute, ~3x a week:
- I'm a bigger/heavier rider (>180cm, ~110-120 KG w/ gear, but only ~75cm inseam)
- relaxed, comfortable ride (won't be using throttle much, at all, but a lot of "lazy PAS" power)
- ~30 KM each way (a bit under 60 KM round trip). ~20 KM flat/hard maintained trail (but with leaves, some gravel, etc). 10 KM on road (with hills).
- ~200-300 meters change of elevation/hills (on the road sections)
- it rains a lot here , but snow is not a concern
- I would like to mostly keep the battery between 80% -> 30% and not stress the battery beyond that, if possible. Buying an extra charger and recharging at work is doable (but more range the better and would like to be able to make the trip 'comfortably' on a 90%+ charge without having to recharge at work, if possible).

My initial thinking is that the AM1000 should certainly offer better range. Same battery on both, but a lot more rolling resistance/weight on the CC FAT.
However, I was also thinking that the CC FAT would offer a more comfortable ride and might be a better match for my weight.
...but I don't know how much I am giving up on either side (and don't know what to make of the mullet config for my needs). I think I'm leaning slightly towards the AM1000, since the range difference is easier for me to quantify than the possible differences in comfort/weight handling.

I'm interested in getting some unbiased third party perspectives , bonus points for anyone who has experience with either setup (mega bonus points for those who have ridden both, but realistically not expecting those to be awarded). I did see the update from @AtlasRearden in the CC Fat thread, but while the bike seems like it could be a good fit for me, the range/efficiency may be a bit shy of what I'm looking for.

Overall, both bikes look great and I'm sure either would "work", but this is a big $$ purchase, so I want to do my due diligence in evaluating the the best one for me. Thanks.

 

[JRA]

I have been using the mullet setup for 5 years but have been riding primarily 29" wheeled bikes fr/rear since 1999.

When I got my similar bike, LUNA Z1, last year I rode it in the stock 27.5 both ends configuration for awhile but noticed that the front end didn't respond to the dips and lumps of the trail like I was used to and adapted a 29" wheel to the front and immediately felt back at home on the bike. Hard to think that such a small difference in diameter can make a difference but to me it does. However if you are used to 27.5 already I doubt it would make much difference to you either way so go with the option that is the right color......That green one is nice.

As far as range goes it really is dependent on the amount of assist you use to maintain the speed you desire which is hard to quantify but the Ultra motor bikes are a bit notorious for using more wh/mi than bikes with lesser watt motors. I don't subscribe to the 30-80% thing personally because my rides, which average around 25 miles, demands starting with a fully charged battery and coming home hoping I have enough to zip up the last hill. While doing as you suggest would not allow for that at the rate I use wh/mi which is usually around 25+wh/mi or so dependent on my mood but can be substantially less if riding with slower friends I can easily do 35 mile rides or around 20wh/mi.

 

[taserface]

When I got my similar bike, LUNA Z1, last year I rode it in the stock 27.5 both ends configuration for awhile but noticed that the front end didn't respond to the dips and lumps of the trail like I was used to and adapted a 29" wheel to the front and immediately felt back at home on the bike. Hard to think that such a small difference in diameter can make a difference but to me it does. However if you are used to 27.5 already I doubt it would make much difference to you either way so go with the option that is the right color......That green one is nice.

Cool, thanks--do you notice any differences with the mullet setup on level/uphill ground? The benefits of mullet seem to make sense for downhill/really bumpy stretches (and makes it easier a bit easier for someone with a short inseam, like me, to have at least one 29er ), but wondering if it comes with any drawbacks. If it's not noticeable otherwise, I would probably go w/ the mullet if I pull the trigger on the AM1000, since I think that's what the bike was designed for.

I'd love the dark green Frey has, but for the AM1000 I think I prefer black over the lighter green... but looking forward to when that's the primary decision left .

I don't subscribe to the 30-80% thing personally because my rides, which average around 25 miles, demands starting with a fully charged battery and coming home hoping I have enough to zip up the last hill.

Yeah, I don't mean it would be a hard rule w/o exceptions, but more of a general guideline I would try to keep in mind more often than not. Basically, I just want some headroom w/ range, since I know li ion + 100%->0% discharges will significantly degrade the effective cycle life of the cells, so don't want that to be the 'norm' for a regular commute... but there will certainly be times where I top it off to 100% and run it hard/low.

Anyone know how BBSHD+cadence compares to Ultra+torque, w/r/t efficiency? I'm guessing they are relatively comparable? (I have experience with the former, but not the latter.)

 

[JRA]

The diameter of the two are not that far off where you will notice any difference on level or riding uphill. The primary reason, for me at least, is that I like to run a thinner tire in the front than the rear for enhanced steering and get the benefits of a wider tire that enhances hook up. At least that is what made me switch because there were a few times on my initial rides that I put the front end into a situation like a depression or a root and it just didn't like the roll over. You might notice that off road motorcyles for years have used a similar equation?

A friend I ride with has a BBSHD bike and also has a Z1 and he thinks they are about on par wh/mi wise. The torque sensing of the M620 though for me tips the scales over a BBSHD's standalone cadence sensing because I don't get the more natural feel at the pedals that I am looking for. Caveat is that others prefer it the other way around.......

 

[taserface]

The diameter of the two are not that far off where you will notice any difference on level or riding uphill. The primary reason, for me at least, is that I like to run a thinner tire in the front than the rear for enhanced steering and get the benefits of a wider tire that enhances hook up. At least that is what made me switch because there were a few times on my initial rides that I put the front end into a situation like a depression or a root and it just didn't like the roll over. You might notice that off road motorcyles for years have used a similar equation?

A friend I ride with has a BBSHD bike and also has a Z1 and he thinks they are about on par wh/mi wise. The torque sensing of the M620 though for me tips the scales over a BBSHD's standalone cadence sensing because I don't get the more natural feel at the pedals that I am looking for. Caveat is that others prefer it the other way around.......

Ah, makes sense/sounds good, thanks.

And yeah, the lack of torque sensor on BBSHD is the main reason I'm looking to upgrade, tbh (and why CANBUS is a deal breaker). If their was an easy way to swap motors, I'd just do that... Only real issue I have currently with my bike is that I don't like how disconnected the cadence sensor feels (well, and my battery pack just died, but that's an easy "fix"... but I used the dead battery as an opportunity to see what else is available these days and ended up here ).

 

[greeno]

I started off on the e-bike journey like alot of you guys. Found out about the company up in El Sagundo and built up some bikes with the BBSHD motors.
Great motor but you got to find the right frame to build up to make it worthwhile. Loved the motor and thought that as the the only way to go especially running 4" tires and a thud buster seat post. Also had a 100mm Wren fork up front to smooth things out a bit.

Until....

I tried an Ultra motor with the torque sensing feature. For me it was a game changer. I actually have to work harder to cover he same ground which has made me a better rider. You gotta think more on technical stuff when to push harder for that extra oomph to carry you into the next section.
I would never go back knowing what I know now.
The Ultra is just as easy to work on as the BB-S-- series motors and parts cost about the same.

Considered a bike from Frey but the wait was to long for me.

Ended up buying a frame and motor from a company and then just building everything else up from scratch. Bought this frame because it allows space inside the main triangle for me to build a larger battery.

Didn't know if I would like going from 4" tires to 2.8" especially through soft sand but I don't even give it a second thought now.

Got rid of the thud buster and put in a 120mm dropper too.

I really liked my Wren fork but it was going to take forever to get the size I wanted from Kevin so I went local and now run a 160mm Fox 36 factory up front and a RS super deluxe select + in the rear.

Got a 29" on the front as well and many a time it's saved my a-- from launching over the front. It's different steering at slow speeds in tight corners but you get used to it pretty quick. If I was just mainly running on the streets I would go with a 27.5"/27.5" combo.

As far a geometry goes you'll never notice the wheel size difference with normal riding. Riding slow and turning in a tight area you will.

 

[taserface]

FWIW, to close the loop, I went ahead and purchased the AM1000 w/ the 29er/27.5 mullet setup yesterday.

Frey did (re)confirm that their AM1000 bikes are UART (it sounds like only the Beast is CANBUS).