Turbo Como 3.0 tune to mimic analog bike?

[mcdenny]

I've gotten back into biking via my E Bike and am thinking about getting an analog bike for more fitness rides. Storing another bike is an issue though plus the obvious cost of the bike.

The Turbo Como is a real pig to peddle with the motor off but I'm wondering if anyone has figured out the "sweet spot" for ECO tune that would make the 62# bike feel like a 25# hybrid road bike.

Probably a lot to ask, but hey...

 

[RTeremi]

Take your weight plus the bike weight as a value. Ride a flat stretch of road with the power off, but look at the power value displayed; this power value is all you at this point. Divide the bike weight from the total weight; so you get the pct which is just bike weight. Now turn on the power and in small increments watch the power value. If your bike was say 25% of the total weight, the powered ride should be something like 75% of your original self powered value. Meaning; the assist is just taking bike weight; you are still pedaling for your weight. Hills will be similar, you’ll need to rework all this for new values. then there’s wind, at which point you’ll realize life is too short and you should just adjust the power until we feel good about your ride.

 

[Ben J]

There isn't going to be any one setting like that. Going uphill you'd want power to cancel out the weight. Going flat you'd need a lot less power (and mainly only when you start from a stop). Going downhill the weight is an advantage.

I think your main choices are: Go into microtune mode and just dial up and down 10% at a time to suit however you feel at the moment. Or, use the smart settings to pick a heartrate and let the bike adjust automatically.

Personally I don't think I would have gotten back into cycling as an adult without an ebike, but after a summer of riding regularly again, my last ride I went 30mi and 76% of the time the assist was off. Part of the reason I got a Specialized bike was that it has the fine power adjust that my first ebike did not. I've been very happy with that part, and also happy to be able to dial up the assist if I overdo it and I'm still miles from home.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

The 20/50% assistance would be a good starting point. If you have serious hills ahead, go for 20/100%. The first number is for reducing the assistance, the other will reward your pedalling effort with more assistance (harder or faster pedalling).

I call these settings the "workout mode".

 

[mcdenny]

Thanks for the replies so far. I have ECO set at 20-40. After riding a bit today in OFF mode I think I’ll try 15-30 tomorrow.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

After riding a bit today in OFF mode I think I’ll try 15-30 tomorrow.

Please tell us how it went. There is some power threshold below which a mid-drive motor does not work very well, and then it only makes sense to ride OFF.

 

[Ben J]

There is some power threshold below which a mid-drive does not work very well, and then it only makes sense to ride OFF in such a situation.

My Tero X 6.0 has the 90nm motor, so it may not apply to all bikes, but I ride in microtune 10/10 regularly and it's definitely more assist than "off".

 

[Stefan Mikes]

My Tero X 6.0 has the 90nm motor, so it may not apply to all bikes, but I ride in microtune 10/10 regularly and it's definitely more assist than "off".

Your 2.2 motor has the boost factor of at least 4x with the peak motor power of 565 W. If you pedal it at 150 W (?) leg power, the 10% assistance requests 60 W mechanical power from the motor but you have capped the motor at 56.5 W. It means you are constantly assisted with not less than 50 W. Como 3.0 has a less powerful motor with a lower boost factor.

I have found approximately 36 W is the threshold motor power where it has issues working properly. It might be hard for you Ben to realize that because the Specialized full power motors are so quiet and you also cannot go below 10/10%. I could detect these issues with a louder SL 1.1 motor, and another user has detected a similar phenomenon with the latest TQ motor. At extremely low motor power, the control system puts the motor under intermittent (oscillating) powering as the motor itself cannot physically deliver that little power.

 

[mcdenny]

Got some data to share. This interest in fitness is because I just got an Apple Watch (Series 4, watch IOS9). That's how I measured the rides and a comparison is shown to the Mastermind Calories data. Each ride was the same 0.6 mile loop around my neighborhood, moderate hills, no traffic or stop signs.

The Apple Watch calorie data obviously doesn't take into account the electric boost (in spite of their claims to the contrary). Pedaling along effortlessly in TURBO registers the same calorie burn as riding with the motor OFF. Average heart rate does show the difference in effort.

The Tern is an old bike I had laying around from our camping days. Probably not at all representative of a nice hybrid road bike but its the only choice I had.

Conclusions: Riding the Como OFF felt similar in effort to the acoustic Tern, assuming the watch measures calories accurately for regular bikes. This surprised me as turning the motor off while riding assisted feels like deploying a parachute. Doing the whole ride with the motor off actually didn't feel too bad.

ECO 10/20 still gave a noticeable boost over OFF and still burnt 40% more calories than at the old 20/40 setting. I'm going to try this for a longer ride soon and see how it feels.

 

[fooferdoggie]

apple gives me way more calories then my Garmin or my bosch system. both of those pretty much come up the same using my heart rate and the bosch using the watts I put out. apple matches the Garmin when I dont wear a HRM. then they both are way high.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

The Apple Watch calorie data obviously doesn't take into account the electric boost (in spite of their claims to the contrary).

That would be different if your Como were connected to a GPS bike computer and then the ride data were sent to Strava (I'm discussing a possible scenario). Unlike the Apple Watch, LEV ANT+ devices (Garmin, Wahoo) pick up the Specialized motor pedalling power sensor data, and present these data in their apps and on Strava. I think you could get some results in Mission Control or Specialized App too. The problem is, your traditional bike has no power sensor, so there is a problem to compare the ride data between a Specialized e-bike and a regular bicycle.

I have compared two Vado SL rides over the same 8.5 km route ridden at a similar speed, one with a regular (significant) assistance and another with the assistance OFF. I burned 90 kcal on the assisted ride and 169 kcal on the unassisted ride. No idea what would be the kcal burnt if I rode a lightweight traditional bike though.

What is the weight of your Tern? How does it compare to your Como?

FYI: at 10/20% Como 3.0 assistance, you are getting 28 W assistance per 100 W of your leg power with the assistance limit of 86 W.

 

[mcdenny]

That would be different if your Como were connected to a GPS bike computer and then the ride data were sent to Strava (I'm discussing a possible scenario). Unlike the Apple Watch, LEV ANT+ devices (Garmin, Wahoo) pick up the Specialized motor pedalling power sensor data, and present these data in their apps and on Strava. I think you could get some results in Mission Control or Specialized App too. The problem is, your traditional bike has no power sensor, so there is a problem to compare the ride data between a Specialized e-bike and a regular bicycle.

I have compared two Vado SL rides over the same 8.5 km route ridden at a similar speed, one with a regular (significant) assistance and another with the assistance OFF. I burned 90 kcal on the assisted ride and 169 kcal on the unassisted ride. No idea what would be the kcal burnt if I rode a lightweight traditional bike though.

What is the weight of your Tern? How does it compare to your Como?

FYI: at 10/20% Como 3.0 assistance, you are getting 28 W assistance per 100 W of your leg power with the assistance limit of 86 W.

The Tern only weighs about 30# but it’s a little folding bike so the ergonomics don’t fit me at all. Como is 62#. It also has bigger softer tires but the ergos fit me much better. I’m 162# if that matters.

The Apple watch is the only way I have to measure effort on the acoustic bike.

the CAL SPEC column is the calorie data from Mission Control screen.

Your comparison rides on your Vado show the unpowered ride using roughly double calorie input. My comparison above shows the same ratio, the unpowered ride took twice the calorie input as the same ride with 20/40 assist. Calorie data from Mission Control. Note the Apple watch showed the same calorie burn whether unpowered or turbo 80/100 assist. Mission Control showed unpowered taking 6X the calories of turbo, which sounds right. Doing this little loop at 12 mph in turbo seemed effortless. I was huffing and puffing to do it unpowered.