Is it me or is it the bike?
- Thread starter Taff
- Start date
on the Aussie whirlpool site there is mention of the jumper having a different motor now (Dapu ?) but dont know if it applies to all the NEOS.
Theres none on the 2012 ones either as far as im concerned (or at least none that you can notice)
OK here's the latest ride and my conclusions. Photos in album. Ride in Blog
38 miles, 2254 ft ascent.
Ride Link: Cyclemeter - Cycle - Jun 7, 2013, 8:04 AM
The Horseshoe Pass is about a 3 mile climb which averages just under 6% but has sections over 20%.
According to the Woosh predictor:
Steepest gradient: 30.3%
(at marker) hub drive bikes require pedalling hard for 2.6 miles
I don't think it's that steep but 24% may be about right for a small section.
I sailed up this climb leaving a racer way behind. I didn't struggle at all although some sections were tougher than others.
Conclusions
Still no difference between any of the settings.
Clearly Eco isn't Eco.
Rather than let my speed drop, I rode naturally and the motor seemed to do the trick.
I think that as some have suggested the bike gives me the power I need to climb regardless of the setting.
If I can get up this very easily, then there isn't much I'm going to worry about.
In summary - I'm not going to stress about the settings. In future I'll leave it on Eco.
38 miles, 2254 ft ascent.
Ride Link: Cyclemeter - Cycle - Jun 7, 2013, 8:04 AM
The Horseshoe Pass is about a 3 mile climb which averages just under 6% but has sections over 20%.
According to the Woosh predictor:
Steepest gradient: 30.3%
(at marker) hub drive bikes require pedalling hard for 2.6 miles
I don't think it's that steep but 24% may be about right for a small section.
I sailed up this climb leaving a racer way behind. I didn't struggle at all although some sections were tougher than others.
Conclusions
Still no difference between any of the settings.
Clearly Eco isn't Eco.
Rather than let my speed drop, I rode naturally and the motor seemed to do the trick.
I think that as some have suggested the bike gives me the power I need to climb regardless of the setting.
If I can get up this very easily, then there isn't much I'm going to worry about.
In summary - I'm not going to stress about the settings. In future I'll leave it on Eco.
D
Deleted member 4366
Guest
If you want to test your panel settings, do it on a flat bit of road. Set it on lowest level and pedal gently. Note the speed. Go back to start and do the same on the next level. When you've done all levels, compare the speeds.
My observations are that the different modes give different levels of kick from stand still and on the relatively flat. The other difference is speed at which the assist starts to cut out (eco seems to be about 20 kph all the way up to boost at about 30 kph).
so my conclusions are the same as yours, but the method is slightly different.
I tried some big hills today (for me at least) one at 18 % one at 24%, the bike went up them both pretty easily. I then tried some experiments with pedalling gently and hard and changing the settings....and i still reckon its related to torque applied, and once you exceed a maximum it doesn't give anymore, and conversely it doesn't restrict you to a maximum in a lower assistance level.
my theory (happy to be contradicted) the assistance settings act as a multiplier to the applied torque (which would technically be pretty trivial) but as above both are restricted at the same maximum.
pedalling gently (ie not apply much torque) i can detect changes in the assistance (though not as much as i'd have thought) pressing hard on the pedals results in no noticable difference.
Starting off at any level of assistance puts you at the same speed on a single push of the pedals on the same bit of road (wish i'd read d8veh's post above before trying it as his is a much better idea to measure!)
but in summary, same as you, eco always and very happy with the way the bike hefted my gargantuan bulk up what passes in hampshire for a signifficant hill
I tried some big hills today (for me at least) one at 18 % one at 24%, the bike went up them both pretty easily. I then tried some experiments with pedalling gently and hard and changing the settings....and i still reckon its related to torque applied, and once you exceed a maximum it doesn't give anymore, and conversely it doesn't restrict you to a maximum in a lower assistance level.
my theory (happy to be contradicted) the assistance settings act as a multiplier to the applied torque (which would technically be pretty trivial) but as above both are restricted at the same maximum.
pedalling gently (ie not apply much torque) i can detect changes in the assistance (though not as much as i'd have thought) pressing hard on the pedals results in no noticable difference.
Starting off at any level of assistance puts you at the same speed on a single push of the pedals on the same bit of road (wish i'd read d8veh's post above before trying it as his is a much better idea to measure!)
but in summary, same as you, eco always and very happy with the way the bike hefted my gargantuan bulk up what passes in hampshire for a signifficant hill
I've got the Neo Jumper and I find that on any steep hill as long as I'm not going over 28kph the motor will be assisting in any setting,whereas on the flat you can certainly feel the difference between all four assist settings.
So another agreement with it's all to do with the amount of torque,so uphill unless you're in a very low gear you're getting maximum torque on any setting.
So another agreement with it's all to do with the amount of torque,so uphill unless you're in a very low gear you're getting maximum torque on any setting.
I don't use assistance on the flat so I don't experience the difference. All makes more sense now.
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
