Hey Stefan,
Ok you got me thinking again. I have to admit I was a bit conflicted tonight. I had doubts and playing both sides meaning sometimes it seemed bad and other times not so much. I even questioned Kim like "You have 39% left and we traveled 28 miles...that doesn't seem bad to me". But she countered me with "Yeah but it's been on eco the whole time and harder to pedal than before because it's 35/35 instead of the usual 35/100...I'm used to getting more than this"
Ok here are some facts about the ride and in general...
Almost no wind at all which frankly was unusual
Virtually 100% flats on this route. Not even a small hill.
Yes the battery shows degraded to 90% capacity
Average speed 12mph
Battery use at different stages were...
Distance 4.8 miles 9% used
Distance 9.1 miles 18% used
Distance 15.4 miles 32% used
Distance 19.6 miles 41% used
Distance 25.0 miles 54% used
Distance 28.0 miles 61% used
As a test the last 4 miles I told her to put it on turbo which is 100/100.
Final reading was 32.1 miles 78% used
She won't tell me her weight...ever
But I will say she is above average in height and weight but I don't wanna say cuz she is reading this thread with me
Also we have a bag in tow and we carry a lot of stuff...so weight is significant...very significant. Her effort level however is also very significant. She has come a long ways and her endurance and strength is above average as well. We are both early fifties in age.
So we had the Como 3.0 tested a couple days ago...everything checked out under diagnosis. That plus your detailed statistical analysis..I'm starting to think we might be high or something
..but...We are very experienced riders who know our routes and the new motor 'seems' to be draining more juice. But the battery is degrading (as they all do) and weather conditions are always unique.
Your comments about the motor are VERY insightful and I even brought that up on the ride home. I said "How do we know it's the same motor they replaced...they make upgrades and modifications all the time" So now I know there are 1.2 and 1.2e motors which is so helpful to know. You may be exactly right and that could be most of what is going on. She might have had the 12e motor and now has the 12 motor. That plus natural battery degradation (and other factors) may add up to what we are encountering. Plus just checked these specs on her Como (12e was the original motor) on the Specialized website:
Motor | Specialized 1.2 E, custom Rx Street-tuned motor, 250W nominal |
Battery | Specialized U1-460, On/Off button, state of charge display, 460Wh |
One final tidbit...or clue...the ride prior for the first time we used smart control and programmed Distance into it and let it do its thing (meaning it picks the power level for you). When we did that power drains were much less...but effort levels had to increase somewhat...but not drastic I think.
Anyway thanks Stefan
You gave my brain much to ponder and now I have more details to discuss with the lbs. Honestly though I'm starting to feel this mystery is solved. It's probably the more powerful 12 motor that was installed.