Trek Checkpoint Plus Range?

[Nomadmax]

This could very well be a "how long is a piece of string?" question. And if it is, I understand.

I have an Allant 8s that I use for errands and the occasional zone 2 ride in-between my hard, non electric road/gravel bike rides. I'm considering a Trek Checkpoint Plus SL5 e-gravel bike but wonder about the range.

My question, is it possible to roughly extrapolate the range of the Checkpoint based on my ride on the Allant today?

I started with 100% charge on the Allant. Rode 34.01 miles, at 15.97 mph average, with 1352 feet of climbing. I was in zones 1 and 2 for the entirety of the ride and it was very, very windy (gusts over 30mph with a steady 10-15). I started with 100% charge and ended with 20%.

My thinking is the Checkpoint has a smaller battery, but;

Will have clipless SPD pedals and real cycling shoes. Not running shoes and flat pedals
Will have drop bars and not have me sitting bolt upright in the wind
Weighs at least 20 pounds less than the Allant and has much less rotating weight
Has the geometry/body position of my regular bikes that will allow me to add human power more efficiently

I'm kinda stuck on the idea that if it can't pull off 35-40 miles in these conditions while still allowing me to go easy, I'd probably skip it. The Allant is a great bike but it's an around town commuter for me. Spending two hours or more on it in one sitting isn't my idea of a good time.

 

[BlackHand]

So you used a little over 14wh/mile on that ride. (608 nominal wh/34 mi). Was the wind a headwind or tailwind or was this an out and back route?

The same consumption on the Checkpoint+ 360wh battery would net you a little over 25 miles. You would need about 10.5wh/mile on the Checkpoint+ to do the same 34 mile ride. That doesn't seem unreasonable.

FWIW, I alternate between a heavy Haibike Trekking 9.0s and a lighter Bulls Desert Falcon. The Bulls is very similar geometry to the Checkpoint+ you are looking at but with skinnier road tires and 10lbs heavier. I go faster at lower assist and put out less effort on the Bulls than on the Haibike. ~5ish wh/mi is exercising. 7-8wh/mi is mild work. 10+ is cruising and not really thinking about it- I might use that much on a morning commute with lots of accelerations and keeping it above 22mph where possible.

 

[Nomadmax]

So you used a little over 14wh/mile on that ride. (608 nominal wh/34 mi). Was the wind a headwind or tailwind or was this an out and back route?

The same consumption on the Checkpoint+ 360wh battery would net you a little over 25 miles. You would need about 10.5wh/mile on the Checkpoint+ to do the same 34 mile ride. That doesn't seem unreasonable.

FWIW, I alternate between a heavy Haibike Trekking 9.0s and a lighter Bulls Desert Falcon. The Bulls is very similar geometry to the Checkpoint+ you are looking at but with skinnier road tires and 10lbs heavier. I go faster at lower assist and put out less effort on the Bulls than on the Haibike. ~5ish wh/mi is exercising. 7-8wh/mi is mild work. 10+ is cruising and not really thinking about it- I might use that much on a morning commute with lots of accelerations and keeping it above 22mph where possible.

It was a four corner circuit of just over eight miles each lap, so sometimes a block headwind, then side wind and tail wind. I may go over to the Trek dealer and see what the owner has to say. (Not a Trek owned store).

They do make a spare battery for it that's 160 wh but it's probably 700 bucks all in and you lose a bottle cage. That's a lot of scratch to basically do what I already can with the Allant, albeit more comfortably. It's between riding the Allant and staying indoors on the trainer for the easy days. And I'm kinda tired of the trainer from winter.

Thank you for the reply.

 

[stompandgo]

Get the range extender and don't worry about range. You can do all the math in the world but you really won't know your range until you ride it a bunch of times under varying conditions. There are too many variables.

 

[Nomadmax]

Thanks for the replies

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

You can do all the math in the world but you really won't know your range until you ride it a bunch of times under varying conditions. There are too many variables.

This is the reality, but...

I'm kinda stuck on the idea that if it can't pull off 35-40 miles in these conditions while still allowing me to go easy, I'd probably skip it.

How easy? That's key.

If I put in 150W of normalized rider power in a mix of ECO and SPORT assist modes, I can easily get 40 mi with 50+ ft/mi of climbing out of the 320 Wh battery in my 38 lb 240W 35 Nm Specialized Vado SL 1.

That's with a 190 lb rider in so-so shape. I wouldn't call that "easy", but it's not hard, either. For a guy who likes hard road rides, might be easy enough.

The Checkpoint has 40 Wh more battery and weighs 8 lb less. But it does have more torque, and that means potentually higher current draws from the motor if you actually put all that torque to use.

So, if 150W of normalized power is easy enough for you, then the Checkpoint may well serve your needs. Test if at all possible.

BTW, the SL5's two-tone blue paint job with yellow accents is absolutely gorgeous!

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Contrary to what Jeremy said, I'd agree with Stomp. There are too many variables. For instance Jeremy says "150 W rider power at 170 lb rider's weight". What if it is a "60 W rider power at 232 lbs"? Hills or no hills? Elevation gain? Average speed? Wind: weak or strong? Headwind or tailwind? Ambient temperature? The surface ridden? Riding at a constant speed or with frequent stops? Tyres? Pressure? There are even more factors to affect the range.

Only an experiment can prove anything, and not always.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

Only an experiment can prove anything, and not always.

I believe I started with that.

However, my intent was to give a real-world example, not far from the OP's case, showing that if 150W of rider power is "easy" enough for his purposes, a bike like the Checkpoint could well be good for 40 mi with 50+ ft/mi of climbing with a 190 lb rider aboard. Watts are watts.

Yes, many other variables to consider, but the similarities and known differences between the Checkpoint and my SL factor in a lot of them.

Giving hope here, not promises.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

The 150 W is as good leg power as the rider might go without any assistance if not the hills or headwind I just want to remind everybody that the range of any bike with the assistance off is infinity

Some calculation:
Nomad used 80% of a 625 Wh battery on his 34 mile rolling hills ride with Allant+ 8s. Making it 500 Wh or 14.7 Wh/mi. I would say the more lightweight bike with drop bars could get the figure down to 10 Wh/mi. Now, 5% of the e-bike battery is unusable. The usable charge of the 360 Wh battery is therefore 342 Wh. The estimated range for the Checkpoint is then 34 miles (same as Allant+).

It is important to mention Nomad would need to provide more leg power input if he wanted to make a ride comparable to Allant+ on the Checkpoint.

My own experience: I own a Vado 6.0 and a Vado SL. The big Vado is twice as powerful as the lightweight Vado SL. If I want to have the same performance on both e-bikes, I simply need to double the assistance on Vado SL. That's why I own as many as 4 Range Extenders.

 

[stompandgo]

I believe I started with that.

However, my intent was to give a real-world example, not far from the OP's case, showing that if 150W of rider power is "easy" enough for his purposes, a bike like the Checkpoint could well be good for 40 mi with 50+ ft/mi of climbing with a 190 lb rider aboard. Watts are watts.

Yes, many other variables to consider, but the similarities and known differences between the Checkpoint and my SL factor in a lot of them.

Giving hope here, not promises.

There's nothing wrong with estimating, as long as everyone knows that it's estimating. It's when estimates get purported as facts because the math says so is where we may diverge in opinion. But you knew that. No need to drag that argument back up again.

I think your estimate seems pretty close to me. Let's see what the real world says.