What's your farthest ride on a single charge with a Vado?

M

Mr. Max

Active Member
I'm curious? I got my Vado 4 a couple of weeks ago. Since then I've ridden every day. Most days are 20-25 miles. Today I rode 41 miles with 37% left on the battery. How about you folks? How far have you ridden without recharging the battery?
 
Altitude climbed, rider weight, wind strength are significant factors missing in these comparisons... Strava can provide altitude climbed.
 
Mr. Max said:
I'm curious? I got my Vado 4 a couple of weeks ago. Since then I've ridden every day. Most days are 20-25 miles. Today I rode 41 miles with 37% left on the battery. How about you folks? How far have you ridden without recharging the battery?
Click to expand...
Depends on how fast you go, weight, wind and how much unassisted you ride. Most I've ridden is 30 miles and had 84% battery remaining. My average speed 11 mph. 😄. I also rode 62 + miles on a single charge. 9% battery remaining. Check out BLEvo thread to see stats. It varies. Lowering default assists increases range a lot and pedaling unassisted.
 
That's awesome! So you've gone 60 miles on a single charge. I'm not looking for scientific data. Just a ball park guesstimates of how far individual forum members have gone. Thanks Kam1936! You are a machine!

On a simplistic human level, I've discovered that at exactly 20 miles my butt starts hurting with the stock Vado seat and no comfort seat post. In fact, that's my primary limiting factor right now. Not how much my legs or the bike can take, but how much my butt can take. I didn't foresee that.
 
We did 34+ miles on California's Monterey Bay trail last Summer. Paved trail over rolling sand dunes most of the way. Got back to the room with 60% battery.
 
Bear in mind the elevation gain is the dominating factor on the range when any hills are involved (that's why the e-MTB riders cover few miles but report huge elevation gain for a battery charge). The rider's weight is mostly reflected on the elevation gain. The wind resistance is the second parameter affecting the battery range. The bike speed is the third parameter (the air/wind resistance affects the power demand in the cube power against the air speed resisting the ride). The rolling resistance is the fourth parameter (strongly inflated slick tyres offer less resistance than low-pressure, fat knobby tyres). The low ambient temperature degrades the battery capacity. How much the motor supports the rider is the typically forgotten parameter (if the rider provides 100% power with their legs, the range grows to infinity). Also, in case the rider makes many starts/stops (steady long ride vs a city commute ride), the battery range shortens.

Having said all above: With no hills, slick tyres inflated to the rated maximum, at temperatures in 40's F (below 10 C), riding steadily into 35 km/h (21.8 mph) headwind, using 50% support, the best range I got on my Vado since November 1st, 2019 was 59.5 km (37 mi). Typical range I was getting on similar rides but with 70% support was a tad less than 45 km (28 mi).
 
Last edited:
Good info here, except that the air resistance increases as the square of the velocity as noted in this excerpt from Wikipedia on Drag:

Drag depends on the properties of the fluid and on the size, shape, and speed of the object. One way to express this is by means of the drag equation:

F_{D}\,=\,{\tfrac {1}{2}}\,\rho \,v^{2}\,C_{D}\,A

where

F_{D}
is the drag force,
\rho
is the density of the fluid,
v
is the speed of the object relative to the fluid,
A
is the cross sectional area, and
C_{D}
is the drag coefficient – a dimensionless number.

We can't do anything about the density of the air (although it's less at altitude), and the drag coefficient is mostly a factor of the aerodynamics of the bike (unless you want to get one of those "time trial" streamlined helmets, so the main variables are the velocity and cross sectional (or "frontal") area. This is why an upright riding position is at a disadvantage over a forward leaning position. Pedaling my road bikes into a headwind I've seen firsthand how I can pick up a couple mph simply by getting all the way down into the drops with my chin practically on the top of the head tube -- but that's not the best position for being able to see ahead!

That said, this thread is interesting just to see what the extremes are for people trying to maximize range vs maximizing performance, etc. I think someone mentioned commuting to work at top speed in Turbo all the way and not minding running out most of a charge since they just have to recharge for the trip home. I'm more interested in long round trips at conservative speeds with just a little boost for comfort.

As they say: YMMV
 
Atlas472.JPG


Now these bikes have a low drag coefficient! They're so aerodynamic that there's virtually no negative pressure area in their wake, i.e. another rider can't draft off of them. These designs hold the world speed record for human powered vehicles, well over 80mph now.
 
Sierratim said:
Now these bikes have a low drag coefficient! They're so aerodynamic that there's virtually no negative pressure area in their wake, i.e. another rider can't draft off of them. These designs hold the world speed record for human powered vehicles, well over 80mph now.
Click to expand...
Very cool, but they might be interesting to try to ride in a stiff crosswind!
 
Yep. The design criteria includes a harness system and a Kevlar sheet on each side of the rider to protect them from injury in a high speed 'fall over' crash, which happens more often than you might think. At the end of the season the handmade carbon fiber shells are usually worn down to the Kevlar at the riders shoulders.
 
Sierratim said:
Now these bikes have a low drag coefficient!
Click to expand...
A typical recumbent bike has very low drag as well. I could not win a race with a recumbent bike rider even if I pursued him in the Turbo mode, and he was on his leg power. However, recumbent bikes are poor climbers.

On topic: Turbo Vado 5.0 "Class 3", 60% Support, 604 Wh battery, side-wind, range 50 km. (Riding on the flat in slightly rolling terrain).
 
OK...Here's a question for all you engineering/mathematically able types (not me!). I have a Creo, my far less fit friend has a Vado. We went up a 7.6 mile climb with about 1,500 ft. elevation gain together today, with our bikes set in Eco at 35%. She was right on my wheel, chatting up a storm. I wasn't close to maximum effort, but I certainly wasn't feeling like Chatty Cathy either. I know for sure that if we were both on non-e bikes she would have been way behind me. So what gives? I have been under the impression that if I have support level set to 35%, the motor will give me 35% more power, i.e., my 100 Watt effort will translate to 135 watts output. Is that wrong? Is power output a function of the size of the motor itself? Obviously the Vado has a much bigger motor than the Creo - 400-something vs. 240. Curious.
 
I don't want discuss the Support modes and motor tuning but two things are sure: Vado has a way more power than the Creo (don't look at the nominal power but the peak power) and the Vado has massive torque of 90 Nm while Creo has 35 Nm. The torque translates to the climbing ability.

What is the weight of each of you?
 
Last edited:
Stefan Mikes said:
I don't want discuss the Support modes and bike tuning but two things are sure: Vado has a way more power than the Creo (don't look at the nominal power but the peak power) and the Vado has massive torque of 90 Nm while Creo has 35 Nm. The torque translates to the climbing ability.

What is the weight of each of you?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
TCU warranty only 2 years on the Vado SL
Replies
14
Views
989
Steve Brown
S
W
New Creo2
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Allan47.7339
Allan47.7339
E
Vado 3 IGH sort of review
Replies
0
Views
986
Ebikelife72
E
M
My Old Vado Lives to Roll Another Day
Replies
1
Views
781
mfgrep
M
C
Turbo Vado SL 5.0 EQ
Replies
8
Views
3K
Jeremy McCreary
Jeremy McCreary
Back