Buyers Guide

Hi all,

we've begun work on a Buyers Guide for the main site. As we are trying to build up a big Owner Reviews section, I felt it might be useful to summarise the ratings "at a glance" in a table format.

Each bike listed will have a further page called FAQ whereby we aim to fill it with other useful information such as:

Price

Availability

Specification

Change History

Known Issues

Links to forum threads

External reviews / other sites

The Specification table we intend to use our own format so that at some point, all the information can be placed into a database which can then be queried by the user so they can narrow down the selection of bikes based on certain criteria i.e. frame size, price etc..

If you have any other useful information which could be included please respond to this thread.

As always, if you have any ideas on how we can improve it further - we'd love to hear them.

cheers!

Russ

Good idea Russ. I'd been thinking of something on these lines myelf in one of my sites, but it's better placed here.

The biggest problem is the sheer lack of full specification information, if only manufacturers/suppliers would emulate the motor industry's full disclosure model.

Therefore some things might be best dealt with by approximations rather than having precise information on just some models. Frame size is an example. We could drop them into small/medium/large (SML) ok, but the chances of getting precise inch measurements for all models is probably very small.

Peak power? Impossible to get reliable figures when they all say "powerful", so I don't know how you'd want to handle that. Users experience? Most only know the model they own so they cannot judge, it's a difficult one.

Certainly be able to get most of it together though.

.

Edited May 30, 200718 yr by flecc

That 10 star rating systems seems particularly subjective.

I agree. Things move on, and a rating from just a few months earlier can be invalidated as new models come on line.

It might be best to just stick to facts and leave the subjective part in the content of the threads that are linked to.

.

I havent given a review of the Twist as theres already 2 there and its not made anymore?

I think it would be a good idea if you did though John. Adding reviews can provide adjustment on previous ratings, so making allowance for progress in the market. A bike that was the almost uncontested best a year ago won't necessarily be that now.

.

Rating System

That 10 star rating systems seems particularly subjective.

What "10 star rating system"? Where can one find that, or the reference to it/

Peter

What "10 star rating system"? Where can one find that, or the reference to it/

Peter

Hi Pete,

Flecc and Tim are referring to the Buyers Guide table which currently sorts the bikes according to the overall rating given by each of the owners.

As mentioned the problem with it is that everyone scores differently so you might give a bike 9/10 rating and someone else gives it an 8/10.

Would people like to see this dropped? Do we lose the display of the rating entirely on the table, or leave it and just sort bikes by another method e.g. alphabetically, price, manufacturer etc.?

Should we expand the Owner Reviews further and not just rely on a simple x out 10 rating. Should we score on a number of different factors e.g. Reliability, Running Costs, Buying Experience, Aftersales Service etc..

At Pedelecs we don't have the ability to spend weeks testing every bike but I'm keen to arrive at something fair and representative!

whilst possibly of very little use to a prospective purchaser the star rating is a good way of displaying the reviewers opinion of that bike in his/her situation, but it would need to be made clear that was all it was.

if the reviewer gives no indication of there normal usage then the star rating becomes of no use at all.

i also think that a review should contain information on how long that person has been an ebiker, not just how long they have owned that machine,we all know how blown away you can be after your first ebike ride.

the order would best imo be price, but perhaps not easy to keep correct so how about alphabetical.

we need to be careful not to give the idea that only expensive ebikes with modern battery technology are worth buying, to give an example the torq would not do what the powabyke does for me although technically it is a more modern superior machine.

mike

I agree with the points Mike makes, but think it best just to stick with facts as far as possible. As I've mentioned above, things progress, so even a review after 3 to 4 years knowledge of a bike can be modified by the advances of newer bikes, and also by growing experience on reliability with time.

Subjective evaluation is dangerous. Only yesterday I was attacked in a scathing email for saying the Twist was a good towing bike on my site, the writer too unfit to get it to take him up a hill solo. But the fact is the Twist is one of the best hill climbers around due to it's motor drive through gears, coping with almost any gradient, albeit at slow speeds.

At the same time, I have some in here insisting the Torq is a good hill climber, though it's demonstrably one of the poorest, only up to 6% on it's own.

Given such wild extremes of opinion, and both hopelessly wrong, subjective judgements should be avoided as far as possible.

.

Fact or Perception?

I agree with the points Mike makes, but think it best just to stick with facts as far as possible. As I've mentioned above, things progress, so even a review after 3 to 4 years knowledge of a bike can be modified by the advances of newer bikes, and also by growing experience on reliability with time.

 

Subjective evaluation is dangerous. Only yesterday I was attacked in a scathing email for saying the Twist was a good towing bike on my site, the writer too unfit to get it to take him up a hill solo. But the fact is the Twist is one of the best hill climbers around due to it's motor drive through gears, coping with almost any gradient, albeit at slow speeds.

 

At the same time, I have some in here insisting the Torq is a good hill climber, though it's demonstrably one of the poorest, only up to 6% on it's own.

 

Given such wild extremes of opinion, and both hopelessly wrong, subjective judgements should be avoided as far as possible.

.

I agree.

What is needed is a published 'specification' of the member offering the critique.

Some time ago I asked for publishing/reading member's details to be published by them so that a balanced, comparative view could be taken.

Such details would be:

Weight :Age- it's all in the interestes of science: Health- just a general observation - not a disclosure of intimate details: Fitness - "Lance Armstrong" or "7 stone weakling" or somewhere in between:.

I asked for some of these to be declared by members but I forget which thread they were on and now my senior's memory ( see my profile) cannot bring it back. Rather than publish these essential statistics at each critical posting they could be made available in the posting member's profile. It is then an easy matter to 'click on the posters handle' to get the critique into perspective. (I have practised what I am preaching).

Then quotes like................

1. Hill Climbing

That may sound obvious, but it's the primary advantage. A good electric bike effectively flattens hills, increasing your average speed and eliminating the 'groan' factor when a gradient comes into view. Provided you supply a reasonable amount of effort, you can expect to climb hills of 1 in 10 (10%) on an electric bike with ease, and clear a maximum gradient of 1 in 7 (14%), or much more. In hilly country, the effect is nothing short of miraculous

Who are they talking about? Which Bike???

....................could be consigned to mythology where they belong.

I must update my profile - when I can find out how to do it.

Peter

to put it in a nutshell a buyers guide imo should not be directly related to a owners review, a buyers guide is a collection of facts put together in a simple easy to understand manner, a owners review is the thoughts of an owner about using the bike to meet his/her own needs.

people need to make a short list from the buyers guide, and then read the reviews to maybe help make the decision of which bikes to try..

mike

What is needed is a published 'specification' of the member offering the critique.

Some time ago I asked for publishing/reading member's details to be published by them so that a balanced, comparative view could be taken.

i agree with you Peter

ime 58 pretty unfit, lazy with pedaling,13stone, smoke but dont drink

mike

Can still be of limited use though. I'm a non smoker. But that hides the fact that I smoked at least 60 a day for 40 years.

The best way for me is just the factual. Viz: What can the bike alone climb without pedal assist/pedal pressure? e.g. Sprint 10%, Torq 6%. That way really does compare the bikes abilities, and each potential user can judge from their knowledge of their own fitness what level of bike power they need to supplement their power.

.

Can still be of limited use though. I'm a non smoker. But that hides the fact that I smoked at least 60 a day for 40 years.

 

The best way for me is just the factual. Viz: What can the bike alone climb without pedal assist/pedal pressure? e.g. Sprint 10%, Torq 6%. That way really does compare the bikes abilities, and each potential user can judge from their knowledge of their own fitness what level of bike power they need to supplement their power.

.

I have great respect for what you say Flecc.

I tried my wife's new Sprint 7 with a fresh/new battery (Lithium) up the A30 Hill to Shaftesbury. It is 10% (maybe just 9% in parts). 750 metres long from the point at which I joined it.

I felt that there was no way the Sprint 7 would reach the top unaided.

I maintained a speed of 10.5 mph with some considerable effort (better than I can do with the Torq) but the red light was on for the last 50 metres. Of course I was in the lowest gear which I believe is 39 inches (see spec on 50 cyles).

The battery display turned back to green shortly after I eased off on the flat bit before the roundabout. I rturned home on after 18 miles and the battery display was on green at the end when stationary.

This perhaps is something to do with the fact that I am above average weight (90 kg).

Peter

Hill climbing, that's the crunch.

Yep I agree too. Almost like you have a category 'Hill Climbing' and then each reviewers comments listed below each other as well as a mini profile of the reviewer 'age:21; weight:10st; Fitness lvl: Excellent' (I wish )

So how much difference would you make compared to me (Weight - 14.5 stone: Health - poor: Age 78: Fitness level- very poor)?

My bikes will still go along the flat at 15.5 mph (and the Torq at 23 mph derestricted) unassisted.

But we are a different kettle of fish on a hill above 5%.

This is where the comparisons really begin to speak between one rider and another and one bike and another.

Peter

Edited May 30, 200718 yr by ITSPETEINIT

Nigel

BY PETE

I tried my wife's new Sprint 7 with a fresh/new battery (Lithium)

Hi pete

how would you rate the performance of sprint 7 say compaired to the torq which i have i am looking out for a second bike ie is it a good hill climber i think it is a bit more heavy then the torq does it accelerate better then the torq. cheers pete.NIGEL:D

Peter your absolutely right. I am 39, 16st 10lb and have poor health (all caused by myself and a poor routine of basically sitting on my a*** driving and eating rubbish).

I know its a sore discussion point, but the Twist I have can honestly go up anything. I have a 1 in 6 or 8 (I think) just outside my house. Neither I nor my wife nor either of my average fitness daughters can ride up it without standing (and only the very fit 15 yr old can do that). But on the Twist I get up it at 8mph in 3rd gear.

There is a 1 in 3/4 that I have now excluded from my route which was the only test of the Twist for me. This was the only time I ever went into first gear. Not being funny, but I would find it hard walking up that hill. It is actually easier on the bike, but it drains battery power.

I guess what I trying to say is basically I agree 100%, it is a combination of both the bike and the rider (still wish I was 21 though ).

john

Edited May 30, 200718 yr by JohnInStockie

Hi all

I admire your ambition & efforts to undertake the complex task of putting together a buyer's guide, Russ and all involved - it will not be easy to make it fair and comprehensive for many reasons e.g. lack of bike specifications, riders' varying individual experiences, abilities, and requirements due to local terrain etc.

Some suggestions/ideas:

Main issue is that at present it is more accurately a summary of subjective owners' reviews: I think the main information in a buyers guide should be factual, and that the owners' reviews provide useful additional information: that way the 10 star user rating system can be seen in its correct context alongside similar but objective ratings for different performance criteria, which could all be put in one table for ease of viewing.

(There would remain the fact though that any guide incorporating subjective reviews & ratings of e.g. performance/reliability is open to abuse to mislead buyers, but I think thats much less likely to occur if it is used only as an adjunct to objective information and in conjunction with the forums too.)

The onus is on the bike maker/seller to provide specs on bikes as a performance guide e.g. range, hill-climbing limits etc.: (their accuracy/realism can be shown by owner reviews) if they do not then to me that speaks volumes in itself, and such information must be considered as "missing" unless it can be reliably estimated/verified by other means. It is by no means up to us as buyers to "extract" such information.

As a footnote, if such specs are only given in a "standardized" form e.g. max gradient for 75kg rider with pedal assist etc. then it may be possible to guesstimate performance for riders of different weights & ages/abilities, but I still say the onus is on the maker/seller to provide more useful information in the first place.

A guide is just that, and I think with so many unknowns it would be best to make clear it should be used to narrow down to a shortlist which can be tried out & compared for real

I hope thats useful

There is definitely plenty to think about here. I think what I will do initally is remove the out of 10 ratings from the table and sort the bikes by another criteria.

When creating the Owner Review form, I tried to keep it simple by just highlighting Strengths, Weaknesses and and an Overall Summary. That way a user could read through all the reviews and see whether a pattern emerges i.e poor hill climbing or reliability issues etc.

There is benefit in expanding this further so that some additional information is provided by the rider. That way if performance is discussed, then it can be put into context.

Sprint v. Torq

BY PETE

I tried my wife's new Sprint 7 with a fresh/new battery (Lithium)

Hi pete

how would you rate the performance of sprint 7 say compaired to the torq which i have i am looking out for a second bike ie is it a good hill climber i think it is a bit more heavy then the torq does it accelerate better then the torq. cheers pete.NIGEL:D

I'll tell you about My Torq and ME first of all:

It's great with the delimiter off - 22 mph on the flat and hill climbing greatly improved, but it uses the juice.

When the battery was new 10 months ago (done 500 miles all told) I got 28 miles along flat roads with gentle, very gentle assistance except for a last massive hill 1 km long about 7% grade - very hard work pedalling, brings me almost to my knees. The bike had not been delimited then.

The riding position for me (see my profile) is a bit too much 'weight on arms' causing 'handlebar palsy' after a few minutes. So I fixed the throttle and made it 'sticky' by freeing the allen key screw and forcing the rubber grip against the end of the h'bar (interior). I can now ride one 'right' handed.

To rest the right hand is easy because no controls are affected.

The front forks are a hell-of-a rough ride. I've messed about with tyre pressures with little respite .

Now the Sprint 7 and ME:

It will only do 15.5 mph so I don't have to look over my shoulder for 'coppers'.

Actually I've caught it out in favourable circumstances (whether wind or down-grade I'm not sure) doing nearly 17 mph (unassisted) with the motor still running.

Up hills it is much easier than the Torq. My nemesis hill 10% or even 11% for 750 metres can be managed without a rest at about 10/11 mph in bottom gear (39 inches - same as the Torq now) so I must be getting more from the motor probably because of the motor's internal gearing. It is still a work out for me but not exhausting, just tiring.

The riding position is much better (built for comfort not for speed). That's because the Head tube is much higher than the Torq and there may yet be a little height adjustment in the Quill type head stem.

Gears are slick on the move or stationary: an advantage in traffic if you have not kept awake to the situation.

If you are a 'foggie' the step through is an added advanatage for those of us who can no longer get their leg over the saddle. My shins are pitted with scars from mounting the Torq.

The suspension is ACE:

I have not had it long enough to have a view of range but after 20 miles and that hill the indicator at stationary was still on green.

Am I convinced? I'm looking for a Sprint 7 to replace my Torq which is for sale again.

If you feel, reading these critiques, you'd like a very good (done less than 500 miles) lightly used Torq 10 months old send me a private message. This one could be set up just right for you with quids worth of extras.

I was surprised that the Torq gave the rider so much assistance when starting on steep hills (that's 1 in 15 - 6.66%, to me): it's off in a flash.

So is the Sprint: much the same.

You can't change the rider's gearing on the Sprint hub without affecting the other end of the range by the same degree (e.g. changing the rear sprocket).

But I have modified the Torq to 44 chainring x 12 to 32 cassette with an Alivio Rear Mech. Just like the Forza/Forte. So the gearing is much the same as the standard Sprint. I need all the help I can get on serious hills and in that respect the Sprint has the edge over the Torq for me bacause of the motor's built in gearing.

If you are a strong biker and can keep it going at 12 mph the Torq night just win it for you on the real hills and on the flat.

Cheers

Peter

Buying Guide

Can I be controversial and say that I don't think it is a good use of time to do this? I say that not because I don't think it would be very helpful, but because:

- it would be a lot of work - both the initial project and the task of keeping it up to date

- hard for any one of us to do something objective when we all have our own views and prejudices,

- this board already contains a wealth of rich information on a wide variety of bikes to give a prospective buyer a vivid picture of different alternatives.

When I was interested in researching bikes, I did a search on each model on this board, and got great information with the type of detail that you just never could get in reviews or guides, and would recommend that to anyone else.

I certainly ldon't mean to be negative! I think more useful investments of time would be either better search tools for the site, or a list of 'must read' posts for each type of bike.

Frank

I normally like using search tools Frank, but the site seems to have a storage limit on past posts. My posting history shows only 500 posts, eliminating the 1330 posts before that, so all the older posted info from before 30th March seems to have disappeared.

.

Nigel

Hi pete

great review many thanks i also own a torq but for me living in hampshire the hills are not to bad so i am quite happy with my speed machine i am sure you will have no problem selling your torq:D

flecc

I normally like using search tools Frank, but the site seems to have a storage limit on past posts. My posting history shows only 500 posts, eliminating the 1330 posts before that, so all the older posted info from before 30th March seems to have disappeared.

is this due to the cost,is the site being run out of someone's pocket,if so i would rather pay a small fee if that's needed to take us forward, and defiantly rather than see us end up with pop ups for financial support.

perhaps it could be linked to the other thread about members titles- up to 100 posts member after that an option to say send £5 somewhere and be upgraded to associate member,after all most of us have had £5 value.

mike