Vado vs. Turbo X/S Efficiency -- How many Wh/mi?

[ROJA]

I'm curious what kind of power usage stats you guys are seeing. I've heard that mid-drive bikes are supposed to be more efficient but I don't know if that's actually true.

I'm typically seeing 17-20 Wh/mi and I'm cruising at around 26-27 mph (average is more like 20 with stop lights but my speed on Strava segments is 26+). My rides are quite flat and I'm almost always in Eco50.

To calculate this, I look at what % of the battery I've used, multiply it by the battery size, and then divide it by the ride distance.

E.g., on a recent ride I ended with 52% of the battery left (meaning I used 48%) after going 17 miles. I have the 691 Wh battery, so my calculation is:

.48 * 691Wh = 332Wh used. 332 / 17 miles = 19.5Wh/mi

I'd be curious to see what others are seeing, especially Vados going at 26+ mph. Thanks!

 

[pocomo]

My 21-mile round-trip commute generally consumes 42% - 44% of my Turbo X's battery, generally riding in the 18 - 22 mph range. This works out to ~ 14.5 Wh/mi which makes sense based on the lower speed.

 

[Douglas Ruby]

With my base Turbo, I use 90% of the 691Wh battery at around 75 mi. or around 8.3 Wh/mi. with an average speed of around 15 mph. At Full Turbo with a drop back of ECO70 for the last 15%, and averaging 20-ish mph, I can go 40 mi using 95% of the battery or 16.4 Wh/mi. So for me, the averages are around 8.3 Wh/mi at ECO50 and 16.4 Wh/mi at full boogie tilt (but with a 200W motor instead of 500W).

 

[bazzapage]

I've ridden and tested plenty of bikes, and for those that exhibit less battery use than my Turbo S, there is always a plausible explanation. Like it doesn't provide as much assist, for example (limited speed ActiveLine Euro bikes), or I am riding at its speed limit so it mostly me (as I found when commuting on a Levo recently)... When I tested the original Vado 3.0 it ran out of battery long before I expected it to. I had believed the hype about mid drives being more efficient. They are 'more efficient' in that they are better through a wider range of situations, but in the end it comes down to physics. How much work is the motor doing, vs how much goes out in heat or EMF? I think when you boil it all down, the heat and EMF are negligible compared to the work, and hence one motor at speed 'x' is largely the same as another at the same speed. Am I wrong, all the engineers out there?