REVIEW: QR-E 250W ELECTRIC BOOSTER BICYCLE MOTOR AND B60i AND B70 BATTERY

[EMGX]

Looking forward to your report.

 

[kenz]

Yes it from Qiroll. I don't have permission to reveal it yet but definitely i saw it and will do a test once it arrive at my door step. They didn't have name yet for their new unit, its still a prototype. It claimed to be able to conquer steep hill with power wattage over EU regulation. If they allow me to post picture and test details then i will share it given permission but for now i'll keep it a secret while doing intense test ride. Everything looks the same except it has slightly bigger roller but i can't see what friction tape it use. So i'll be detaching the PRO and install the "power monster" soon. Looking at overall spec from my email it seem very promising.

Hopefully it have a new function that detach itself from the wheel or switch to power off.

 

[3dxl]

Hopefully it have a new function that detach itself from the wheel or switch to power off.

Can't say much but hopeful, guess i'll have to wait until it arrive.

 

[3dxl]

Looking forward to your report.

Prototype QIROLL 400W+arrived!
Good news! I received the prototype/test unit QIROLL 400W+ today. Happy to say the overall size of the unit "almost" the same as PRO slightly few grams heavier. The motor/roller diameter is 0.5cm larger than PRO version. The USB and power connection power, cable, remote and accessories remain the same + quick release adapter. It can be use on H70 battery pack but i don't know if it can be use other rated battery pack. However it still using that same stock rubber friction tape, i'll be using back my DIY 3M grip floor tape as usual.

I can't post the picture of the unit yet unless QIROLL representative or Jason gave me permission to post it here. Will be doing installation this weekend and do some real test on hills climbing soon during my daily commute. Looks very promising.

 

[3dxl]

QIROLL 400W+ preview (test unit).
Ok got green light from QIROLL Mr. Jason to share you this 400W+ unit in this forum. So far they have not assigned any naming type to this unit like PRO, MUTE or FLEX hopefully it will have a name soon once they announce a final production unit. Attached are the photos i taken this morning.
*Note: Its not a final production unit, but there going to produce it soon.

Photos:

 

[karkodup86]

Super sprawa ciekawe jaka cena bedzie

 

[3dxl]

Super sprawa ciekawe jaka cena bedzie

Price not yet announce, i think they still manufacturing it.

 

[3dxl]

400W+: Try to install but....

So i did test the 400W+ QIROLL yesterday but i find there some issues.

1. Too long/protruded to fit on standard bicycle such on road bike, gravel bike or other commuter bike with short chain stay. The clutch already extended to max angle. You can see from the picture attached the unit has very long protruded reach unable to fit on rear chain stay neither able to adjust the clutch angle latch to tire, it doesn't even fit behind rear brake caliper at upper triangle frame. The clutch rotation angle movement already max up not allowing it to clear the tire area unlike other models like PRO, MUTE and others. I tried to use additional provided mounting to get more clearance but it does works because it already hit the bulging part of bottom bracket. I can see this one build for older bicycle frame with longer/larger triangle and 100% more likely able fit folding bike or frames with smaller wheels.
2. Regen braking not working, i press the circle button on the remote and it won't stop. (I'll post video on twitter soon). You'll have to use brake lever as usual to stop the bike ....else maybe i got a dud since its a test unit.
3. 30 second test run without any load (no tire contact) on my hand it get extremely hot to touch. Was worry how much power it consumed. Took a FLIR temp photo on it.
4. Stock/default friction tape still got ejected violently when i test throttle run it on my hand. DIY 3M floor tape still the best choice to date.

The Problem: The problem of this unit is not the size of the roller which only have minuscule 0.5mm differences in diameter, but its the angle of the clutch not giving enough degree of clutch rotation to clear the space to sit on the tire. I think Qiroll push the clutch angle higher a bit give it more up extra degree of rotation adjustment.

Conclusion: I don't think this unit able to fit on any performance bicycle since modern one have shorter chainstay clearance between rear tires and bottom bracket. However this type of bikes are the one benefits more with 400W+ power if we could get it fit. Hope Qiroll make special adapter mounting for it.

Possible use for it: As for me i think i'll just have to get a folding bike and fit this 400W+ unit just to have fun. But i won't be bike commuting to work on small wheels daily, maybe grocery shopping going up the hill side which helps a lot with having 400W+motor with climbing power. I'll let you guys know once i done shopping for another tiny bike with long chain stay.

The Good news: I love their "Quick Release Rack" they included in the kit. Makes mounting the motor easy since the screw mount to secure the unit is screw from below the frame (when the bike flipped upside down) rather then tooling the allen/hex key between the narrow gap behind frame seat tube, chainstay and tire. Nice!

 

[3dxl]

Dear Qiroll, 400W+ unit need more clearance angle fit the tire. Modern performance bicycle and racing frame all have short rear frame triangle.

 

[Manel]

Opening these batteries is a pain, but you don't really have to. The B70 uses 18650 cells in 6 series 3 parallel -- so you could do the same for yours if you do build one. You don't have to use any specific BMS for the Qiroll to work, though obviously do try to pick a quality one that can handle the expected current, appropriate cells, etc.

So you think i can use the recovery energy with a standar bms? Like a one with a 5 amp charge current or maybe i need more? And for what use is the third battery cable?
Thanks for your help.

 

[Manel]

Other thing that i dont like is the position of the "riding mode" light. Its hard to see in what mode i am using, maybe it would be more easy to see if it was on one side of the motor. I would like to use a bike handlebar grip with the two buttons incluided maybe in a better position and a riding mode light and maybe a battery meter too.

 

[3dxl]

Other thing that i dont like is the position of the "riding mode" light. Its hard to see in what mode i am using, maybe it would be more easy to see if it was on one side of the motor. I would like to use a bike handlebar grip with the two buttons incluided maybe in a better position and a riding mode light and maybe a battery meter too.

Definitely agree with that, sometimes when i use regenerative brake button to brake i didn't realized it actual change sport/boost (Red led) mode to eco (Blue led) after experiencing slow paced ride. To confirm i have to bend down to look underneath the bike for LED light confirmation. Hope Qiroll put those status light on the remote in next hardware revision so we don't have to stop to look below our bike.

 

[Charlie Pendejo]

That's one advantage of mounting the QIroll on a tandem: I can keep looking forward while my stoker (11 year old daughter) looks underneath.

Our Bike Friday "Twosday" tandem folds up into a carry bag - that bag is big, heavy, and awkward, but it lets us get the bike onto trains, buses, and cars, which is super helpful for our summer cycling tours. Folding the bike requires removing handlebars / seat posts and disconnecting some cables, and I probably broke my first switch by forgetting to remove it when folding the bike two years ago. I would really enjoy a wireless switch - though I can't say that it should be a high priority for Qiroll to develop it.

Another complication with the tandem is mounting the motor, because the frame is not standard tubing back near the rear wheel. I have been using Qiroll's adapter for Strida + a shim I had 3D printed (my bike's tube is smaller diameter) which has always been imperfect. I plan to rig up a different mount using a self-closing hinge, which seems like a much better solution. But it may take multiple attempts to get it right; I am a "software guy" without much mechanical talent.

The reason I added a motor: to help with hills. This old steel tandem is a very heavy beast, and carrying a lot of weight with two riders, panniers, etc. Even with both of us pedaling, hills seem much harder than on my old touring bike carrying a load. It's also nice to be able to cover a little more ground each day, but that is secondary. The main reason I added Qiroll instead of Bike Friday's motorized front wheel: that wheel is much heavier, and I already struggle with the bike's weight, whether I'm trying to get it up & down stairs or carry it folded in the bag.

 

[EMGX]

That's one advantage of mounting the QIroll on a tandem: I can keep looking forward while my stoker (11 year old daughter) looks underneath.

Our Bike Friday "Twosday" tandem folds up into a carry bag - that bag is big, heavy, and awkward, but it lets us get the bike onto trains, buses, and cars, which is super helpful for our summer cycling tours. Folding the bike requires removing handlebars / seat posts and disconnecting some cables, and I probably broke my first switch by forgetting to remove it when folding the bike two years ago. I would really enjoy a wireless switch - though I can't say that it should be a high priority for Qiroll to develop it.

Another complication with the tandem is mounting the motor, because the frame is not standard tubing back near the rear wheel. I have been using Qiroll's adapter for Strida + a shim I had 3D printed (my bike's tube is smaller diameter) which has always been imperfect. I plan to rig up a different mount using a self-closing hinge, which seems like a much better solution. But it may take multiple attempts to get it right; I am a "software guy" without much mechanical talent.

The reason I added a motor: to help with hills. This old steel tandem is a very heavy beast, and carrying a lot of weight with two riders, panniers, etc. Even with both of us pedaling, hills seem much harder than on my old touring bike carrying a load. It's also nice to be able to cover a little more ground each day, but that is secondary. The main reason I added Qiroll instead of Bike Friday's motorized front wheel: that wheel is much heavier, and I already struggle with the bike's weight, whether I'm trying to get it up & down stairs or carry it folded in the bag.

Are you using the standard Mute or the Pro? Good that it works well on hills for you, Mute doesn't provide enough power for me on steep hills but it'd be fine on less aggressive climbs. I tried a self closing hinge (the kinds that you can adjust spring tension) also and thought it worked great at keeping pressure of the roller on the wheel without messing with the adjustment screw.
Not sure this would work well for you but I've used truss clamps on other projects (not the Qiroll) and it seems that they might work in your application with a little imagination and fabrication. Here's one that is QR which might be interesting instead of the Strida clamp.

 

[Charlie Pendejo]

Are you using the standard Mute or the Pro? Good that it works well on hills for you,

Pro. It's been what we've needed for the hills where we've ridden. I'm sure its limitations would come into stark focus in more rugged terrain.

Thank you for the truss clamp! That QR could've been extremely useful in place of the Strida adapter, wedged as it is into a very crowded spot which requires unbolting and repositioning the rear rack to allow awkward access to the adapter's long hex bolts.

For the spring hinge experiment, I'll move the motor from seat stay to chain stay, which should be far more convenient. It's oval shaped with a flat top section. My first idea is to attach (one half of) the hinge to a strap that'll be secured around that tube. Perhaps there's enough tire clearance that I could also consider using the standard clamp to hold the hinge-motor assembly.

In addition keeping constant pressure, seems like the spring hinge should also ease mounting requirements in two ways: precise positioning becomes much less critical (and can ignore tire pressure), and I think there's much less deflection force to worry about - if the the motor is jolted it'll pivot around the hinge rather than directly transmit that force to the mount. If that all adds up to a "strap mount" arrangement being sufficient, that'd allow this thing to come on and off the bike extremely quickly & easily.

 

[EMGX]

I don't have a bike like yours but I'm curious, what type of strap mount are you thinking of? Something like this to strap down one of the hinge leaves?

 

[Charlie Pendejo]

Hose clamp like that was an early thought I might return to. Seems like it'd be very secure.

But I'll try something like this lashing strap first:

which would be easier to put on & remove. Rather than rely solely on friction to hold the hinge in place, I'm tempted to glue and/or bolt the hinge to the strap. Pretty sure I have a few straps like this somewhere, if I can dig them up

What I definitely have handy are a bunch of these:

Their stretchiness and hook & loop closure both seem less than ideal here, but I may give one a try anyway, see how secure (or not) it is once mounted.

 

[EMGX]

I hope it works out for you. Let us know how it goes. 105,000 thread views and counting attest to significant interest in Qiroll. I regret not having purchased the Pro version but I had my reasons for the Mute.

 

[Charlie Pendejo]

I hope it works out for you. Let us know how it goes. 105,000 thread views and counting attest to significant interest in Qiroll. I regret not having purchased the Pro version but I had my reasons for the Mute.

Do you think the Pro would've made a big difference for you?

33% higher rated power sounded nice but not necessarily game-changing to me - I was also interested in the regenerative braking. Brake overheating is a hazard for tandem bikes - with double the weight on the same two wheels and rim (or disc brakes, I gather) brakes - on long/steep enough hills. Heck, just slowing sufficiently with only the canti brakes can be dicey on a downhill in the rain.

And actually my ancient (25 years?) tandem already has a front-wheel drum brake to assist with downhill braking. But that comes with a few compromises, and I feel like the regen braking could perform a similar function if I want to swap out the drum brake for a simpler, lighter hub.

 

[EMGX]

Do you think the Pro would've made a big difference for you?

33% higher rated power sounded nice but not necessarily game-changing to me - I was also interested in the regenerative braking. Brake overheating is a hazard for tandem bikes - with double the weight on the same two wheels and rim (or disc brakes, I gather) brakes - on long/steep enough hills. Heck, just slowing sufficiently with only the canti brakes can be dicey on a downhill in the rain.

And actually my ancient (25 years?) tandem already has a front-wheel drum brake to assist with downhill braking. But that comes with a few compromises, and I feel like the regen braking could perform a similar function if I want to swap out the drum brake for a simpler, lighter hub.

I'm not sure because I've never tried a "Pro" but 33% additional power certainly couldn't hurt. My Mute "Plus" does have regenerative braking but it is very limited. I have some long down hill runs (along with long uphill runs) and the regen actually does work. I've had the battery light go up from flashing to solid or bump up from a lower indicator light to the next one up. Qiroll (Jason?) messaged me that regen and resultant braking is much more robust on the Pro.