Orbea Gain D50 ( User learning and experiences )

[AntonioAlfaro]

Let me start with a general explanation (your point 5).
Specialized Turbo e-bikes are divided into "full power" and "SL" (low power) groups; I own a representative of each group. All Specialized e-bikes are equipped with mid-drive motors, torque & cadence (and more) sensors as well as they boast Bluetooth and ANT+ connectivity. Meaning, the rider's power is being measured together with the electrical assistance power (that we know how to convert to the mechanical motor power). The e-bike, rider, heart-rate, and ride data (generally around 50 parameters) are made available to the outer world.

An independent Italian app BLEvo can monitor all these parameters online during the ride, record them, and present in form of reports, maps and Excel sheet for the most detailed post-ride analysis. If required, BLEvo will export the post-ride data to Strava for further analysis. The user can also study the most detailed ride data on the ride map (each ride point has the full data record), in reports, or in Excel.

1. Old Strava records refer to an 18 kg flat bar 28" wheel traditional bike. See the picture in the attachment.
2. Weighted average power of the rider of around 80 W is reported by Strava for long rides on both my Vado (full power) and Vado SL (low power) e-bikes.
3. The Power Curve for a low power Vado SL and full power Vado are attached.
4. Altitude chart for the 43.09 km ride is attached. 48 m elevation gain means flat terrain with perhaps two overpasses on the way.

Thanks Stefan for your fast answer, just and additional question: is there a ways to separate the data power into assistance power and your power in the BLEvo app ? Are those info in the excel report you mentioned?

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Thanks Stefan for your fast answer, just and additional question: is there a ways to separate the data power into assistance power and your power in the BLEvo app ? Are those info in the excel report you mentioned?

Yes. It is very well made. There is one important piece of information: BLEVo can only measure the battery draw (electrical assistance power) but not the mechanical assistance. However, I know the efficiency of the SL 1.1 motor is 80%, and it is 78% for the powerful 1.2s motor. It is so easy to recalculate the energy draw into the mechanical assistance power!

Here are some interesting reports based on the 43.09 km ride (note: ignore any elevation data: BLEvo is hopeless in this respect. I correct the data by Strava later).

So-called "short report".

Excerpt for the "Detailed Report".

Excel data are so extensive it makes little sense to present them here.

 

[AntonioAlfaro]

It has taken me some time to understand the data you provided about the 43.09Km run on flat ground but
based on 623 Wh composition, 1.9 hours of total duration of the route, your contribution of 142Wh and the Ebike 481Wh, come to be in term of average power (during the entire route) :
74.4 W from you, and
253.1W from the eBike.
We can not say (never ) that the average of 74.4W is equivalent to the FTP. No, it just means that on that ride you held 74W for whatever reason, but it doesn't mean that's all you can hold. On this ride you just let the ebike do 77% of the effort.
To really determine our FTP, we must make a measurement following a correct procedure and with the correct equipment (there is a lot of literature and applications about it). I recommend to do such a test.
Let me give an example of a real route of another cyclist and let's see the differences. General data:
Distance 51.83Km, Time 3.23hrs, Mountain pass 1328 meters of ascent, FTP (real measured) of the cyclist is 165W, mass of the cyclist 56Kg, W/Kg near to 3.
The Mahle app was used for battery consumption recording data only, and the Garmin Connect app in conjunction with the Garmin Edge 820 device and PowerTap pedals with power measurement to measure the power delivered by the rider.
We observed that the cyclist delivered an average of 142W from himself and required only an average of 24W from the Ebike. In other words, 15% of the power to carry out this route was provided by the Ebike and 85% was provided by the cyclist. Also note that the sustained average on this trip is consistent with his 165W FTP.
It makes me think that in your case, we can't say that your FTP is 80W or something like that, until a true measurement is done following standard procedures. Never with an eBike.
It is not an issue of age, nor of illness, it is that 80W of FTP seems to be too low, Iam such that you can delivery and sustain much more power. Lastly, I want to tell you that the cyclist in the example I just mentioned has some peculiarities: he is 68 years old and he is a cancer survivor since 10 years.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

It has taken me some time to understand the data you provided about the 43.09Km run on flat ground but
based on 623 Wh composition, 1.9 hours of total duration of the route, your contribution of 142Wh and the Ebike 481Wh, come to be in term of average power (during the entire route) :
74.4 W from you, and
253.1W from the eBike.
We can not say (never ) that the average of 74.4W is equivalent to the FTP. No, it just means that on that ride you held 74W for whatever reason, but it doesn't mean that's all you can hold. On this ride you just let the ebike do 77% of the effort.
To really determine our FTP, we must make a measurement following a correct procedure and with the correct equipment (there is a lot of literature and applications about it). I recommend to do such a test.
Let me give an example of a real route of another cyclist and let's see the differences. General data:
Distance 51.83Km, Time 3.23hrs, Mountain pass 1328 meters of ascent, FTP (real measured) of the cyclist is 165W, mass of the cyclist 56Kg, W/Kg near to 3.
The Mahle app was used for battery consumption recording data only, and the Garmin Connect app in conjunction with the Garmin Edge 820 device and PowerTap pedals with power measurement to measure the power delivered by the rider.
We observed that the cyclist delivered an average of 142W from himself and required only an average of 24W from the Ebike. In other words, 15% of the power to carry out this route was provided by the Ebike and 85% was provided by the cyclist. Also note that the sustained average on this trip is consistent with his 165W FTP.
It makes me think that in your case, we can't say that your FTP is 80W or something like that, until a true measurement is done following standard procedures. Never with an eBike.
It is not an issue of age, nor of illness, it is that 80W of FTP seems to be too low, Iam such that you can delivery and sustain much more power. Lastly, I want to tell you that the cyclist in the example I just mentioned has some peculiarities: he is 68 years old and he is a cancer survivor since 10 years.

Thank you Antonio. To explain my situation better: I suffer from inadequate blood supply to my legs; and high blood pressure combined with medication makes it impossible for me to increase the heart rate past 115. Yes, I can deliver higher power in bursts but not continuously. And I have ridden over 10,000 km in 2021.

If I'm riding the full power, speed Vado 5.0, my usual contribution to the ride is 25-30% (the latter value is for the warm season when I wear lightweight clothing and shoes). And now, there will be the best: my low-power & lightweight Vado SL lets me achieve more than 50% contribution to the ride! And it is perhaps because the SL assistance is half of what I get from the powerful e-bike! (That was the reason I bought Vado SL: the fitness role).

Another interesting fact is the figure of my Weighted Average Power for riding both e-bikes is the same (around 80 W). Does it shed some light?

 

[ngg]

Thank you Antonio. To explain my situation better: I suffer from inadequate blood supply to my legs; and high blood pressure combined with medication makes it impossible for me to increase the heart rate past 115. Yes, I can deliver higher power in bursts but not continuously. And I have ridden over 10,000 km in 2021.

If I'm riding the full power, speed Vado 5.0, my usual contribution to the ride is 25-30% (the latter value is for the warm season when I wear lightweight clothing and shoes). And now, there will be the best: my low-power & lightweight Vado SL lets me achieve more than 50% contribution to the ride! And it is perhaps because the SL assistance is half of what I get from the powerful e-bike! (That was the reason I bought Vado SL: the fitness role).

Another interesting fact is the figure of my Weighted Average Power for riding both e-bikes is the same (around 80 W). Does it shed some light?

Either way, but the data:
74.4 W from you, and
253.1W from the eBike.
they are neither theoretically nor practically possible, since a bicycle cannot give more power than a cyclist. This is the basic setting of e-bike operation.

Furthermore, your cadence of 70 and 102 indicates that you do not have such severely impaired physical function. These are very good numbers for an amateur.

It seems to me that there are problems with the software you use. Maybe even more than with the health condition.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

since a bicycle cannot give more power than a cyclist.

Of course it can. It might not be possible with Mahle x35 motors but is perfectly achievable for all full power Specialized/Brose, Specialized/Mahle, Bosch, Giant/Yamaha, and Shimano mid-drive motors. There is so called "boost factor" meaning how many times the power input by the cyclist is multiplied by the motor. Examples of maximum boost factors:

• Specialized SL 1.1 motor by Mahle: 1.8x (Nominal Power = Peak Power = 240 W)
• Specialized 1.2s motor by Brose: 3.2x
• Bosch Performance Line CX motor 85 Nm: 3.6x
• Giant/Yamaha SyncDrive Pro/PW-X2: 3.6x
• Shimano EP8: 4x
• Latest Specialized MTB motors: 4x.

It has been generally agreed within the e-bike industry the maximum boost factor should not exceed 4x. To match the Boost Factor demand, full power mid-drive motors offer far greater Peak Power than the nominal (continuous) 250 W. For instance, Syndrive Pro and 1.2s pump up to 520 W of mechanical power, Specialized 1.3 can produce 550 W of mechanical power (similar to Bosch CX).

An excerpt from Excel from my last Sunday's sprint:

Calculated boost factor here is 3.4x.

Furthermore, your cadence of 70 and 102 indicates that you do not have such severely impaired physical function. These are very good numbers for an amateur.

I can do high cadence. I hardly can walk (the ailment is called Intermittent Claudication). And I cannot increase my leg power during the ride for extended period of time.

 

[ngg]

Of course it can. It might not be possible with Mahle x35 motors but is perfectly achievable for all full power Specialized/Brose, Specialized/Mahle, Bosch, Giant/Yamaha, and Shimano mid-drive motors. There is so called "boost factor" meaning how many times the power input by the cyclist is multiplied by the motor. Examples of maximum boost factors:

• Specialized SL 1.1 motor by Mahle: 1.8x (Nominal Power = Peak Power = 240 W)
• Specialized 1.2s motor by Brose: 3.2x
• Bosch Performance Line CX motor 85 Nm: 3.6x
• Giant/Yamaha SyncDrive Pro/PW-X2: 3.6x
• Shimano EP8: 4x
• Latest Specialized MTB motors: 4x.

It has been generally agreed within the e-bike industry the maximum boost factor should not exceed 4x. To match the Boost Factor demand, full power mid-drive motors offer far greater Peak Power than the nominal (continuous) 250 W. For instance, Syndrive Pro and 1.2s pump up to 520 W of mechanical power, Specialized 1.3 can produce 550 W of mechanical power (similar to Bosch CX).

An excerpt from Excel from my last Sunday's sprint:
View attachment 114906
Calculated boost factor here is 3.4x.

I can do high cadence. I hardly can walk. And I cannot increase my leg power during the ride for extended period of time.

Stefan, it is not related to the manufacturer of the motor or bicycle, but it is determined by European legislation. Thus, in the EU they are allowed to use e-bikes with a maximum permanent motor power of 250W. Short-term (burst), each motor can generate significantly more power than the declared 250W, including Mahle. This cannot be discussed as it is legally required. As well as the principle that the motor must not give more power than the cyclist himself.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Stefan, it is not related to the manufacturer of the engine or bicycle, but it is determined by European legislation. Thus, in the EU they are allowed to use e-bikes with a maximum permanent motor power of 250W. Short-term (burst), each motor can generate significantly more power than the declared 250W, including Mahle. This cannot be discussed as it is legally required. As well as the principle that the motor must not give more power than the cyclist himself.

30 minutes power is what is called Nominal Motor Power. Peak power is not mentioned by the EU law (except of Austria, where it is 600 W). See also the Maximum Assistance Factor. It is 3.2x. A regular (25 km/h) Vado 5.0 has even a stronger motor but the speed limiter keeps it at 25 km/h. (My version is an S-Pedelec, L1e-B moped).

The same motor.

Nominal Power as defined by EU laws is one that can be continuously provided for 30 minutes without overheating the motor. No more no less. But I can ride my Vado for 25 minutes in full Turbo mode before I need to stop to cool the motor down.

 

[ngg]

I can ride my Vado for 25 minutes in full Turbo mode before I need to stop to cool the motor down.

. . . and what you got. That you need 3-4 spare batteries in a backpack and stand for half an hour to cool your motor every 25 minutes. Well, with Specialized Vado SL, you need twice as much time for 3-4 hours of cycling, and you still have to carry a few spare batteries. I wouldn't even take that Specialized Vado SL to give it to me for free. I can go on that same tour with my Orbea Vibe without wasting time cooling the motor and without spare batteries on the back.

View attachment 114907
View attachment 114908
30 minutes power is what is called Nominal Motor Power. Peak power is not mentioned by the EU law (except of Austria, where it is 600 W). See also the Maximum Assistance Factor. It is 3.2x. A regular (25 km/h) Vado 5.0 has even a stronger motor but the speed limiter keeps it at 25 km/h. (My version is an S-Pedelec, L1e-B moped).

. . . and again, what you got. You have something that is not a bicycle, and you use it as a bicycle. You have something that develops a speed of up to 45 km and requires homologation, insurance and registration, so then you try to use it as a bicycle. You could also install a marine engine, so it would have even more power. In fact, you could buy a scooter for half the price from Vado SL.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

. . and what you got. That you need 3-4 spare batteries in a backpack and stand for half an hour to cool your motor every 25 minutes.

I got this:

2x 604 Wh batteries.

And I got this:

Same two batteries

And I got this:

483 hours pedalling, and you?

I am as good a cyclist as you are, and certainly don't ride in Turbo for most of the time. Therefore I can ride for hours with my mates.

Unlike you, I can legally ride faster than 25 km/h, which allows me riding with my unpowered buddies...

And this is my lightweight, 240 W, 25 km/h e-bike.

And that's what I can achieve with Vado SL not carrying any battery in a pannier but as a water-bottle. (The top speed here is a downhill ride).

 

[AntonioAlfaro]

Many interesting points of view. Let me digest them and I'll be back soon.

 

[ngg]

I am as good a cyclist as you are, and certainly don't ride in Turbo for most of the time. Therefore I can ride for hours with my mates.

Stefan, that's not in dispute at all. What's more, you're a much more active cyclist than me, since I don't have that much time for cycling. Prepare fish, bake fish, go to the beach for a couple of hours, around noon they say it's dangerous to be in the sun, so we Mediterranean people don't even get to cycle like you in the interior of the continent. Joke aside - everything is ok! In fact, I am extremely glad that you can and that you enjoy cycling so much.

The problem was that we didn’t realize you were trying to compare incomparable things, i.e. riding a bike with the motor constantly on (with maximum motor assistance) and riding with minimal motor assistance. And that's it.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

The problem was that we didn’t realize you were trying to compare incomparable things, i.e. riding a bike with the motor constantly on (with maximum motor assistance) and riding with minimal motor assistance. And that's it.

Ngg: You are not quite correct:
Your e-bike gives you maximum predefined assistance (constant) for each PAS level. In each PAS level, you are pushed with constant power, however low that would be.
Mid-drive motors give variable assistance depending on how much power the cyclists inputs in the cranks. More effort = more assistance. (That's why I need to use high Boost Factor % to compensate for my bad legs).

Moreover (at least in Specialized e-bikes) you can freely define the Boost Factor (0-100% of the maximum) and put a cap on Maximum Motor Power (0-100% of Peak Power). Meaning, if I put 10% of Maximum Motor Power on my big Vado, the motor won't assist with more than 52 W.

 

[ngg]

Ngg: You are not quite correct:
Your e-bike gives you maximum predefined assistance (constant) for each PAS level. In each PAS level, you are pushed with constant power, however low that would be.

completely wrong, but it doesn't matter

 

[Stefan Mikes]

But it is correct. You set 60 W for PAS Level 1 and get 60 W. True, @AntonioAlfaro? Wrong?
In my Vado, I set Max Motor Power for ECO as 10%, and the motor will give me anything between 0 - 52 W depending on the Boost Factor % and how hard I would pedalling. If I set Boost Factor % =10% and input 100 W, the motor will only respond with 0.1 * 3.2 * 100 = 32 W (the cap is 52 W).

 

[ngg]

But it is correct. You set 60 W for PAS Level 1 and get 60 W. True, @AntonioAlfaro? Wrong?
In my Vado, I set Max Motor Power for ECO as 10%, and the motor will give me anything between 0 - 52 W depending on the Boost Factor % and how hard I would pedalling. If I set Boost Factor % =10% and input 100 W, the motor will only respond with 0.1 * 3.2 * 100 = 32 W (the cap is 52 W).

No, not at all. According to my records, in the first level of assistance, for example, I received between 30 and 100 watts from the motor, although I set the first level at 75 watts.

On my bike, the boost is resolved automatically, up to the endurance of the motor. If necessary the motor goes over predefined limits (75 watts, e.g.)

 

[Stefan Mikes]

No, not at all. According to my records, in the first level of assistance, for example, I received between 30 and 100 watts from the motor, although I set the first level at 75 watts.

Does the x35 motor have a torque sensor?

 

[ngg]

Does the x35 motor have a torque sensor?

the bike has a bunch of sensors, but I have no idea which ones

 

[Stefan Mikes]

@AntonioAlfaro will know it!

 

[ngg]

I see that it has a sensor for measuring the temperature, separately for the engine and the battery, I also see the PASS sensor. The rest I do not see, or do not recognize ... but, here's what Mahle says about the engine, something I talk about all the time:

" X35 includes its own pedalling sensor (under patent) that enables the manufacturer to install the desired bottom bracket system. This way they get rid of friction, and they achieve very smooth system starts and stops, offering the user a conventional bike when the electrical system is not switched on. This is completely impossible in a central engine."