Reality check!

[Lazygit]

Just thought I would pop a thread in to introduce myself!

I bought a Torq a week ago after researching for about two months. My reasons were as follows:-

I have a mild heart murmur and although I am a fit chap riding up steep hills makes my heart rattle which is irritating so what the hell I thought a little help would not go amiss and I can still get out and about and get some exercise when I want to peddle.

I have a compliance company in financial services and I love tax relief, a bicycle bought by an employer for an employee is a tax deduction and not a benefit in kind. 50 Cycles can invoice you separately for the battery which brings the price down to under £1,000 which is the threshold for this scheme. If you do this and save tax and NI the bike should cost you only half the total cost of the bike.

I like to think I’m doing my bit for the environment etc and have a paperless office etc etc and this makes me feel good that I can cycle 12 miles to work and back. I know that you have to charge the bike bla bla but 4p worth of electricity has got to better than ½ gallon of petrol right, and saves money to boot.

I have a chap that works with me and cycles to work on a normal manual bike roughly the same distance which is great for exercise but you would not want to sit next to him all day after that! I would feel very uncomfortable sweating up some hills and sitting at a desk all day. Now, I can take it easy on the way there and peddle home as fast as I want – shower on arrival thank you!!! Excellent!

Now for the reality –

I have only had by bike for a week so the battery may get better – I have charged it now 6 times and I only seem to get about 14 miles tops AND I have been using pedal only flats and of course down hill.

I like the Torq because it actually looks like a bike BUT the gearing is such that you have to peddle to get up hills and thats it! It has big wheels and low gears which is why it’s fast but you have to put effort into it.

If you derestrict the bike the battery won’t last as long and it is illegal on road. I would be more than happy to get up a hill at 15 miles per hour but you no chance!

As for the 20-30 miles claim - all I can say is that the test have been done in Holland with the wind behind you and for those of you thinking I am a lard arse I am 13 stone and 6 foot.

Having said all that I am glad I bought the bike BUT maybe the gears are slightly wrong. If any of you get the chance look up Schwinns new range of electric bikes – they look fantastic!!!

Ian

 

[ITSPETEINIT]

Gears for Rider and gears for Motor

Just thought I would pop a thread in to introduce myself!

I bought a Torq a week ago after researching for about two months. My reasons were as follows:-

I have a mild heart murmur and although I am a fit chap riding up steep hills makes my heart rattle which is irritating so what the hell I thought a little help would not go amiss and I can still get out and about and get some exercise when I want to peddle.

I have a compliance company in financial services and I love tax relief, a bicycle bought by an employer for an employee is a tax deduction and not a benefit in kind. 50 Cycles can invoice you separately for the battery which brings the price down to under £1,000 which is the threshold for this scheme. If you do this and save tax and NI the bike should cost you only half the total cost of the bike.

I like to think I’m doing my bit for the environment etc and have a paperless office etc etc and this makes me feel good that I can cycle 12 miles to work and back. I know that you have to charge the bike bla bla but 4p worth of electricity has got to better than ½ gallon of petrol right, and saves money to boot.

I have a chap that works with me and cycles to work on a normal manual bike roughly the same distance which is great for exercise but you would not want to sit next to him all day after that! I would feel very uncomfortable sweating up some hills and sitting at a desk all day. Now, I can take it easy on the way there and peddle home as fast as I want – shower on arrival thank you!!! Excellent!

Now for the reality –

I have only had by bike for a week so the battery may get better – I have charged it now 6 times and I only seem to get about 14 miles tops AND I have been using pedal only flats and of course down hill.

I like the Torq because it actually looks like a bike BUT the gearing is such that you have to peddle to get up hills and thats it! It has big wheels and low gears which is why it’s fast but you have to put effort into it.

If you derestrict the bike the battery won’t last as long and it is illegal on road. I would be more than happy to get up a hill at 15 miles per hour but you no chance!

As for the 20-30 miles claim - all I can say is that the test have been done in Holland with the wind behind you and for those of you thinking I am a lard arse I am 13 stone and 6 foot.

Having said all that I am glad I bought the bike BUT maybe the gears are slightly wrong. If any of you get the chance look up Schwinns new range of electric bikes – they look fantastic!!!

Ian

Hello and Welcome Ian:
The gears are not wrong depending on your point of view.
For the rider - 13stone and six foot is NOT a lard arse. I am 6ft 3 ins and 14st 8lbs and my BMI is under (just) 25. But, unless you are fairly fit and healthy the high geared motor ( designed like that - or borrowed from the Quando) is built for speed on the flat (20+ mph derestricted and illegal on the highway) because of the 700c wheels it propels.
I can do nothing about the motor gearing but I've modified the Cassette and Chainwheel: The cassette is 12 (could be 11) to 32 and the chainwheel 44 teeth. That gives me a very low bottom gear for riding with spin up 1 in 10 (not quite managed it yet but I'm getting close) and a cadence in top gear which is quite enough for my old unhealthy body (see my profile): above the comfort zone I freewheel.
If you do modify your cassette to a big 32 cog you will have to change the rear derailleur - I've fitted an Alivio. The chain with 32 rear and 44 front is still the right length.
If you would like more detail post a reply.
The bottom gear is ace if you are caught out with a flat battery.
I went to Galloway in Scotland on a lovely sunny October day and I got 28 miles out of one charge on a Lithium battery (30 miles if you count the last 2 miles which were down hill).
Peter

 

[Ian]

Hi Ian,

I'm Ian too so this could get confusing. I've had a Torq for 9 months now and done about 1000 enjoyable miles on it. I have a couple of NiMh batteries and each consistently delivers 30-35 miles on a charge in my slightly hilly local area but I have achieved 27 miles in the very hilly north Yorkshire moors. I do pedal all the time, after all it is an electrically assisted bike rather than a motorcycle, but I am certainly no athlete and at 11½ stones not that much lighter than you.

It's difficult to understand why your range is so low, 14 miles is the kind of figure other members are reporting with constant full throttle use of de-restricted Torqs, I sometimes de-restrict mine but still get 20+ miles although I do ration all that power.

When the battery dies are you sure it's really flat? Li-ion batteries can suffer short term voltage drops under heavy load as reported in other threads, and the "fuel gauge" cannot accurately reflect the true state of charge as also discussed elsewhere.

Some users, myself included, feel that the standard gearing on the Torq is not ideal. I have modified mine with a 38T chainring which considerably lowers the gearing making pedalling on hills more efficient, this does not alter the motor in any way, it just helps me to help the motor on hills, it would not necessarily suit all users though.

A number of users feel the Torq is not a good hill climber and while I personally have no problem with steep hills I would hesitate to recommend a Torq for use in a particularly hilly area. The manufacturers only claim it's cable of coping with 10% gradients.

As for the Schwinn bikes, well there is considerable doubt the Continental exists outside of a computer modelling program, and as pedelec guru Flecc has stated elsewhere "There are no miracles in e-bike design.."

On a positive note there is a wealth of Torq experience in this forum and we all will give whatever advice we can to help you get the most out of your bike, which, speaking from experience has considerable potential.

Ian

 

[flecc]

The torq motor gearing is 40% higher than it was designed for in the Quando. On the basis that it's an electric assist bike with rider and motor working together, the rider gearing is right from the purist design point of view.

But as you say Ian (lazygit), it's tough on the hills, and as someone who has to ride up 12% and 14% hills every time I go out, don't I know it. The trouble with reducing the rider gearing is that it's partially self defeating. The motor's power band runs from around 12 mph to 20 mph, so a geared down rider climbs below the power band which both reduces power and wastes battery charge. The lower the climb speed, the worse both those get. There's also the valid point that we buy an electric assist to help us on hills, not so we can help the bike on hills!

The Torq is fine for a fit younger rider, or a very fit older one, or anyone on a fairly flat area. I've previously posted some example calculations using standard formulas on some of these bikes with different riders and repeat them here for convenience as they illustrate the situation vis a vis the Torq's gearing using the Quando's motor:

Here three eZee models have been used with four typical riders covering the whole ability range to produce the calculations to determine the steepest hill that can be climbed at each bikes speed for maximum power. Each rider is male for consistency and is presented as a different numbered case study. Gradients numerical and percentage for personal preferences.

1) Rider very fit, athletic, at peak, late 20s, 10 stone/ 63 kilos

Torq: 1 in 5.8 / 17%, Sprint: 1 in 4.6 / 22%, Quando: 1 in 4.1 / 24.5%

2) Rider fit, 40s, 12 stone/ 76 kilos

Torq: 1 in 7.5 / 13%, Sprint: 1 in 6 / 17%, Quando: 1 in 5.3 / 19%

3) Rider a bit unfit, late 50s, 16 stones/ 102 kilos

Torq: 1 in 10 / 10%, Sprint: 1 in 8 / 12.5%, Quando: 1 in 7 / 14%

4) Rider unfit, early 60s, 20 stone/ 127 kilos

Torq: 1 in 13.3 / 7.5%, Sprint: 1 in 11 / 9%, Quando: 1 in 9.4 / 10.6%

Such calculations can never be precise between every case, but the comparison between the bikes in each case is exact of course, so forms a reliable basis for judgement.

 

[coops]

Hi Ian (Lazygit - which I'm sure you aren't!) & a warm welcome to the forum

I've had a Torq now for just over a month and have clocked up around 300 miles, so I'm still fairly "green" but I thought I'd also share some info in case its helpful to your situation.

Without more information about the hilliness of your routes it is difficult to judge whether 14 miles is below what you can expect or not - although it does sound like you have some hills, which though they can be quite a power drain on the battery, with the Torq the steepness of them matters more than on some other bikes.

However, given that you seem able to get up the hills ok (& not too sweaty!), and you are pedalling downhill & flat as you say, then unless you have many of them I think that if your battery is fully flat after 14 miles that does sound on the low side for range: I would try to verify if the battery is underperforming & if it seems to be and bike is under warranty then it may be replaceable.

The important thing is: don't be disheartened because both battery (and gearing) can be changed if required (sadly terrain cannot, but can still be worked around ) and also as you become more experienced you may become more proficient at managing both your speed & range through both economical throttle use & pedalling more (as your fitness improves!).

For comparison, in my fairly flat terrain I get around 20-25 miles minimum when restricted & almost continuous full throttle @ 15mph; 16 miles delimited & full throttle @ 20mph+ !

I went out yesterday & with some non-motor pedalling, pedalling with economic use of throttle (say 13-16mph average) and some small hills I made 30 miles: in derestricted mode! and I found I still had to ride for 10 miles further with the motor to exhaust the battery! 40 miles total! so that's what you can expect. (I'm heavier than most here!)

My bike's setup is similar to Ian's (Leicester) i.e. NiMH battery (but only one) and front chainwheel changed to 40T to lower the gearing (easier pedalling). I'm guessing your battery is Li-ion, which though it may temporarily cut out under heavy load e.g. on very steep hills, should give longer range than NiMH I believe.

As for gearing, I didn't fully understand what you said: if you mean its geared quite high i.e. hard to pedal in lowest (easiest) gear, then that has been said here quite a few times, but if you want to there are several ways to alter the gear ratios e.g. reduce front chainwheel size. I'd deal with the battery issue first though before you choose whether to go there .

One more thing to add - if your hills do seem a bit steep for the lowest gear as it is, I've found that by lowering the gearing and reducing speed & throttle a little you can pedal up moderate hills with motor assist quite easily & economically power-wise - both for you & the Torq battery!

I hope some of that is helpful: if you want more help with your battery/range then by posting more info about how hilly your terrain, speeds you do etc. I'm sure you'll get a lot (more!) of support & feedback here.

Stuart.

 

[flecc]

Stuarts posting shows very clearly the difference that terrain makes. The 40 miles he reports equates with that achieved once by an A to B magazine rider using the same methods in the Somerset levels, a very flat area.

Using exactly the same techniques on my derestricted torq in a very hilly area, the range only goes up from 15 to 17/18 miles at most. It's so little a return for what's involved that I no longer bother to try.

A clear illustration of the ill effect of gearing up the motor 40% in the torq is the comparison of range with that on the Quando with the same motor correctly geared as designed. The Torq returns 15 miles with a very big input from me, especially up the hills, the Quando also returns 15 miles without any pedalling whatsoever. As the saying goes, it's "horses for courses", the Torq being a flat racer and the Quando better over the "jumps".

Although changing the gearing can work in an area with moderate hills, I think Ian should be wary of doing it if he's in a very hilly area due to the self defeating aspect I mentioned above, it could be an expensive mistake. The advert in the classifieds of this site from PeterE, entitled "Another torq for sale" illustrates the problem well. Despite spending lots of money on extensive gearing changes, the bike still didn't suit a hilly area and was therefore sold.

 

[Ian]

Changing Gear

Ian,

if you do wish to experiment with gearing it need not be expensive or involve any permanent mods to the bike. While very expensive chainwheels are available cheaper ones such as the Stronglight brand are available for about a tenner, even less secondhand, my 38T one was about a fiver on ebay. The chainwheel is secured with 5 special bolts with an allen key socket on the front and slots on the back for a special tool, although a thin broad screwdriver blade will do the job. The type required is 8 speed compatible (almost all are), 5 bolt, 130mm pcd (Shimano pattern) and you can go down to 42 teeth without having to shorten the chain, or 38T if you take a few links out.

Ian.

 

[coops]

Its all too easy for those of us in flatter areas to underestimate the negative effect of the Torq's overgearing on steeper hills e.g. 10% & more.

To be honest, when I saw 14 mile range my first thought was "faulty battery": but then when I thought of the hills possibility I realised that may not be true, as Flecc said, and depends how hilly Ian lazygit's terrain is, which we still don't know (unfortunately I'm not familiar with West Sussex either).

I totally concur with Flecc on the re-gearing issue: I suppose the most useful thing for any prospective Torq owner would be a "guesstimated" rough guide to realistic limits of terrain hilliness based on age/fitness of rider (for pedal input), which would go with the guide to range on your site Flecc?

That would prevent unnecesary & ineffective attempts to improve hillclimbing by reducing the pedal gearing which doesn't affect or improve performance of the motor's gearing for hills so steep that rider + Torq geared motor input is insufficient.

 

[nigel]

Nigel

Hi folks
i dont have a problem with the gearing on the torq i have a few nasty hills on the way to work 16 miles one way yes i do have to work hard on those pedels and find if i keep the speed up at 10 mph its ok maybe a bit sweaty but its worth it to me as i want that 22mph top end speed i also find for me its down to throttle control most times i am only using half throttle through out my journey to work never full throttle going up any hill NIGEL

 

[Ian]

One size doesn't fit all

The differing opinions on gearing highlight the fact that everybody's needs are very different. The 8 gears on the Torq cover a narrow range compared to a conventional cycle with a double or even triple chainset, and while that range may suit many people it cannot suit everybody. For instance Nigel is happy to tackle nasty hills at 10 mph with the standard gearing, while I too tackle steep hills at at 10 mph but with my short legs spinning far faster than standard gearing would allow.

I aggree with Fleccs point that the motor operates best above a certain speed, but I don't see re-gearing as being self defeating as the rider is even more dependent on optimised gearing when forced by terrain, traffic, pedestrians or even a flat battery to ride at lower speeds.

That said, anyone riding a Torq in hilly terrain needs to expect to work fairly hard whatever the gearing.

Ian.

 

[flecc]

I don't see re-gearing as being self defeating as the rider is even more dependent on optimised gearing when forced by terrain, traffic, pedestrians or even a flat battery to ride at lower speeds.

Ian.

I agree Ian that gearing down does give the rider a temporary gain in adverse circumstances. The self defeating aspect I mentioned is indisputable though, and referred to two factors, the first being the drop in motor output, in the torq's case for example, a halved output at 6 mph compared with the full output at 12 mph.

The second factor is that although it's easier for the rider to climb a hill with a geared down torq at 6 mph than a normally geared one at 12 mph, it's too readily forgotten that it takes twice as long to get up the hill. Ultimately the rider will have done as much if not more work. As the saying goes, there are no free lunches. To provide the given amount of work to get a weight up a hill, anything the motor doesn't provide due to factor one must be provided by the rider, sooner or later during the climb. Therefore, the geared down rider at their lower speed will have done more work than the normally geared one at the optimum motor speed.
.

 

[Ian]

Everything you say Flecc is of course based on sound logic, however the point I'm trying to make is that with much lowered gearing I can ride up hills that were impossible before, someone with stronger legs may be able to get up at 12mph with standard gearing but for me that is simply not possible.

I accept that the lower speed results in a loss of efficiency, the motor draws a heavy current for longer and I pedal at a faster (but lighter) cadence for longer, but the hill is climbed, possibly only at 6mph but that's better than pushing it at 3mph.

Of course lowering the gearing is a compromise, 25 mph in top gear is really spinning and I doubt even an olympic athlete could pedal very much faster, but the bike suits me far better than in it's standard form,

Ian.

 

[flecc]

Likewise, I completely accept that Ian.

I do understand that you are fully aware of all the factors involved, the only reason I've been making the point about this is that not everyone does, and too many have tried to improve matters without being aware of the implications and ending up still dissatisfied.

As I see things, letting those who need to know that a workaround like this doesn't solve the fundamental problem is what the forum is about. If in doing that my information doesn't agree with what someone else has done to their bike, it's not a criticism of that persons action, which as you've noted is valid for them.
.

 

[Ian]

You are quite right Flecc in saying that others may not fully understand the factors involved, it is easy to forget that others don't necessarily come from an engineering background.

Perhaps the main problem is that the Torq has acquired a reputation that it cannot live up to. While it is undoubtedly a great bike it cannot be all things to all people.

Having said that, I wouldn't swap mine for anything.

Ian.

 

[flecc]

Perhaps the main problem is that the Torq has acquired a reputation that it cannot live up to. While it is undoubtedly a great bike it cannot be all things to all people.

That is so right Ian, and it's something I've often thought as it causes the problems aired in here. For owners in our flatter areas of Britain though, it's an amazing bike, totally outclassing anything else.
.