Torque and Rotation (Cadence) Sensing - Clarification Question

[Deleted member 4366]

Have a look in your pocket. Do you have an iphone? Look in your wardrobe. Do you have clothes with deigner labels? If you answer yes to both of those questions, get a bike with a torque sensor.

Being pragmatic, it makes little difference what type of sensor you have. Once your pedalling, it's hard to tell the difference. On both systems you can turn the power up or down so that you can pedal as hard or soft as you want.

For people that can't pedal hard, I'd recommend a speed control system rather than torque control. The same for commuting if you don't want to get too sweaty. Other than that, it makes little difference. You get an electric bike because you want some assistance. How you get it is not normally important. For a speed control system, you need at least three levels of assist. The ideal is 5 IMHO.

Personally, I don't get all this about torque control systems being better because it forces you to pedal harder. If you want a work-out, ride an unassisted bike. For excercise, I ride my road bike, for everything else, I use my electric bike. You don't need a roadbike. A £10 bike fom the tip will also give you a work-out.

 

[Cyclezee]

Is the only the battery position that is different between the eTR-U and eTR-G ?

Hi Terry,

The difference between the two models is also battery capacity, the eTR-U downtube is 14.25Ah /513 Watt, the eTR-G is 11Ah /396 Watt.

 

[JohnCade]

Have a look in your pocket. Do you have an iphone? Look in your wardrobe. Do you have clothes with deigner labels? If you answer yes to both of those questions, get a bike with a torque sensor.

Being pragmatic, it makes little difference what type of sensor you have. Once your pedalling, it's hard to tell the difference. On both systems you can turn the power up or down so that you can pedal as hard or soft as you want.

For people that can't pedal hard, I'd recommend a speed control system rather than torque control. The same for commuting if you don't want to get too sweaty. Other than that, it makes little difference. You get an electric bike because you want some assistance. How you get it is not normally important. For a speed control system, you need at least three levels of assist. The ideal is 5 IMHO.

Personally, I don't get all this about torque control systems being better because it forces you to pedal harder. If you want a work-out, ride an unassisted bike. For excercise, I ride my road bike, for everything else, I use my electric bike. You don't need a roadbike. A £10 bike fom the tip will also give you a work-out.

I disagree with you completely and the analogy with brands is just stupid. I found a SS bike not like cycling at all and a bit like an old pedal moped without the noise. While a TS bike is just like a bicycle, but one that offers me bionic legs.

If you just want transport maybe there is no great difference, and you won’t get sweaty with a speed sensor because the bike is doing practically all the work. But if you want a bike for fitness and pleasure use with some help on the hills because you are getting old; and you actually like cycling then it’s a no brainer.

 

[trex]

TS for low assist, good on flat roads.
SS for high assist or heavy riders, good on hills.

 

[RobF]

I disagree with you completely and the analogy with brands is just stupid. I found a SS bike not like cycling at all and a bit like an old pedal moped without the noise. While a TS bike is just like a bicycle, but one that offers me bionic legs.

If you just want transport maybe there is no great difference, and you won’t get sweaty with a speed sensor because the bike is doing practically all the work. But if you want a bike for fitness and pleasure use with some help on the hills because you are getting old; and you actually like cycling then it’s a no brainer.

My experience is the same as John's.

The OP is already push-biking and says he wants to maintain some fitness.

He says he is content to change down for hills, and is not after outright speed.

If ever there was an ideal candidate for a torque sensor bike, it is the OP.

 

[anotherkiwi]

Personally, I don't get all this about torque control systems being better because it forces you to pedal harder. If you want a work-out, ride an unassisted bike. For excercise, I ride my road bike, for everything else, I use my electric bike. You don't need a roadbike. A £10 bike fom the tip will also give you a work-out.

I agree, from my limited experience (900 km, 4 kg of fat lost) if I want to do a little bit of sport I just turn the assistance level down. Riding a 20+ kg bike without assistance sure builds leg muscle quickly!

 

[falmouthtony]

My experience is the same as John's.

The OP is already push-biking and says he wants to maintain some fitness.

He says he is content to change down for hills, and is not after outright speed.

If ever there was an ideal candidate for a torque sensor bike, it is the OP.

Agree totally with John and Rob. Personally, I enjoy having the option of either discipline. Depending on how I feel when I get up in the morning,

 

[Terry1100]

If ever there was an ideal candidate for a torque sensor bike, it is the OP.

That's how I'd figured it - thanks for the confirmation

 

[Deleted member 4366]

I disagree with you completely and the analogy with brands is just stupid. I found a SS bike not like cycling at all and a bit like an old pedal moped without the noise. While a TS bike is just like a bicycle, but one that offers me bionic legs.

If you just want transport maybe there is no great difference, and you won’t get sweaty with a speed sensor because the bike is doing practically all the work. But if you want a bike for fitness and pleasure use with some help on the hills because you are getting old; and you actually like cycling then it’s a no brainer.

You need to try a few modern speed sensor bikes with current control.

I guess you have an iphone then.

 

[JohnCade]

You need to try a few modern speed sensor bikes with current control.

I guess you have an iphone then.

I don’f have any kind of smart phone. The phones might be clever but the twats walking along the pavement glued to the screens like zombies aren’t. I have a mobile I keep in the car and on the bike for emergencies and I only switch it on to make a phone call once every couple of months or so. I don’t want to be instantly contactable by every acquaintance.

If you really are looking for stereotypes to fit your prejudices though I’ve used Macs since 1998. Back in the days when the OS was almost as bad as Microsoft. I know how bad Windows was because I had to use it at work at one time. When I used to work - before I became a free man but with one toe in the grave.

 

[oldtom]

There is a fundamental involved in this this thread. If we consider that from the invention of the machine we recognise today as a pedal cycle, right up to the present, the one constant which defined that machine and made it distinctively different from other forms of transport was the fact that propulsion was supplied only by pedalling.

Today, the torque-sensor pedal cycles maintain that feature as purely as is possible while maintaining the basic ethos of the original machines. The assistance provided is relative to rider pedal input though not exponentially so.

As I see it, only those machines fairly merit the nomenclature of EAPC. All other forms of powered cycling should be regarded as mopeds or motorcycles with electric power.

Tom

 

[Deleted member 4366]

There is a fundamental involved in this this thread. If we consider that from the invention of the machine we recognise today as a pedal cycle, right up to the present, the one constant which defined that machine and made it distinctively different from other forms of transport was the fact that propulsion was supplied only by pedalling.

Today, the torque-sensor pedal cycles maintain that feature as purely as is possible while maintaining the basic ethos of the original machines. The assistance provided is relative to rider pedal input though not exponentially so.

As I see it, only those machines fairly merit the nomenclature of EAPC. All other forms of powered cycling should be regarded as mopeds or motorcycles with electric power.

Tom

What a strange conclusion! To be an EPAC (EN15194), the definition is a bicycle that gives power when you pedal and stops the power when you stop pedalling, except that you can still have power up to 6km/h without pedalling. It doesn't mention anything about the power having to be proportional to pedal effort.

In case you don't know, many bikes with torque sensors also have cadence sensors. The controllers have algorithms that combine the two so that you get a certain amount of power by rotating the crank with minimal pedal effort. Bosch and Yamaha definitely do. I'm not sure about Kalkhoff Impulse, but I bet it does.

 

[Alan Quay]

....yada...yada....regarded as mopeds or motorcycles.....yada.....yada.
Tom

Can we put oldtom's persistent comments in a FAQ/Sticky somewhere? It'd save him keep having to type them out.

If he gets any more predictable I will be able to quote him half an hour before he posts.

 

[Jimod]

There is a fundamental involved in this this thread. If we consider that from the invention of the machine we recognise today as a pedal cycle, right up to the present, the one constant which defined that machine and made it distinctively different from other forms of transport was the fact that propulsion was supplied only by pedalling.

Today, the torque-sensor pedal cycles maintain that feature as purely as is possible while maintaining the basic ethos of the original machines. The assistance provided is relative to rider pedal input though not exponentially so.

As I see it, only those machines fairly merit the nomenclature of EAPC. All other forms of powered cycling should be regarded as mopeds or motorcycles with electric power.

Tom

You are priceless.

 

[Jimod]

Terry, you have a couple of choices:
1st, try a few different types of Ebike, with torque sensor and with pedal sensor. Then choose the one you decide is best for you. Try them up long hills and see how you get on.
2nd, fix your Kawasaki, it might be easier.

Ignore the poster who recommended a moped and told you your licence might allow you to ride it. He tells everyone that. Maybe he missed the bit about you having a Kawasaki.

 

[JohnCade]

What a strange conclusion! To be an EPAC (EN15194), the definition is a bicycle that gives power when you pedal and stops the power when you stop pedalling, except that you can still have power up to 6km/h without pedalling. It doesn't mention anything about the power having to be proportional to pedal effort.

In case you don't know, many bikes with torque sensors also have cadence sensors. The controllers have algorithms that combine the two so that you get a certain amount of power by rotating the crank with minimal pedal effort. Bosch and Yamaha definitely do. I'm not sure about Kalkhoff Impulse, but I bet it does.

It’s certainly true that the Impulse allows you to turn the pedals with very little effort and if in a low gear still go up steep hills if fairly slowly. Like a granny on a MB. Very useful if you become tired after going at a long hill too fast in a high gear and knackering yourself. I always assumed the controller was programmed to give some power even with almost no effort so it might well be something like you suggest.

But aren’t you contradicting yourself? You often post in favour of SS systems over TS, and one of your pet themes has been that unlike TS they will still work when you get tired, while with a TS you might find yourself stuck. My experience is that is not the case and now you have explained why this supposed drawback with those systems doesn’t actually exist.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

The adavantage of the speed sensor systems is that you can adjust the power to the level you want regardless of pedal effort, so for hillclimbing, you can turn the power up to the maximum, in which case tired legs doesn't prevent you fom getting the maximum power. It works the other way too of course. You can turn down the power to get low power when you pedal hard if you want. You can't get the maximum power on most torque control systems unless you still pedal hard. Is it the Yamaha that has a special hill-climbing mode that can reduce the pedal effort for hill-climbing? I think they'll all have software options like that in the future.

I think you probably haven't understood how I feel about the two systems. For most people, it doesn't matter a hoot which system you have. They both have advantages and disadvantages in certain circumstances, but mostly, you can hardly tell the difference. What I say is that it's not worth restricting yourself to a choice of only one system, nor is it worth paying extra for a torque sensor bike. Often, we get people trying to convince us that their system (torque sensor) is the best, so I try and present a balanced arguement. If it were only the people on here with speed control systems that were trying to convince everybody that their system was the best, I'd be arguing for the advantages of torque systems.

 

[JohnCade]

Not sure about that. I don't remember you recommending a TS bike once, and you often talk about the supposed stupidity of wanting to put effort into riding an electrically assisted bike. Only yesterday I think it was you wrote that anyone who wanted to do that should just ride an unassisted bike.

Well to take my example I did just that for many years, and was still going on fast hilly rides on my last really good road bike in my mid fifties. But since moving to Wales with its many more and steeper hills a decade and more ago a series operations over a couple or years meant I lost my bike fitness and found it difficult to recover it. Eventually I gave up and started to run with the dog instead. So when I wanted to ride a bike again a TS was just what I wanted and needed. I bought a SS first because I didn’t know the difference, and it was not satisfying and took no effort from me at all; and turning down the power just made it feel the same but not so much fun. It still did not ride anything like the way an unpowered bike rides. In fact I can’t understand how you can think that a straight up SS bike rides anything like a TS bike….. Maybe some do a better job or mimicking rider input now but are they really multiplying rider power like a real TS bike is? I doubt it.

I do have another road bike but at my age I will never go up the hills around here like I used to do and as I can still do fast with my Kalkhoff. Or go on the kinds of rides on it I was used to doing with my old road bikes.

I don’t champion one system over another in all circumstances, I just say the TS bikes are more like riding bicycles than SS bike are so can suit cyclists or ex cyclists better. I know there is a place for both and that SS will be better for many riders too. Particularly if unfit and/or they want a commuter and not to arrive at work sweaty. Or just because SS bikes can be great fun and allow you to go fast with almost no effort. But while I have pointed out the benefits and drawbacks of both systems to new members who ask about the differences - as I said I can’t remember you recommending anything other than a SS bike to anyone ever. So forgive my scepticism.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

You need to try a few modern speed control systems before passing judgement.

 

[selrahc1992]

The adavantage of the speed sensor systems is that you can adjust the power to the level you want regardless of pedal effort, so for hillclimbing, you can turn the power up to the maximum, in which case tired legs doesn't prevent you fom getting the maximum power. It works the other way too of course. You can turn down the power to get low power when you pedal hard if you want. You can't get the maximum power on most torque control systems unless you still pedal hard. Is it the Yamaha that has a special hill-climbing mode that can reduce the pedal effort for hill-climbing? I think they'll all have software options like that in the future.

I think you probably haven't understood how I feel about the two systems. For most people, it doesn't matter a hoot which system you have. They both have advantages and disadvantages in certain circumstances, but mostly, you can hardly tell the difference. What I say is that it's not worth restricting yourself to a choice of only one system, nor is it worth paying extra for a torque sensor bike. Often, we get people trying to convince us that their system (torque sensor) is the best, so I try and present a balanced arguement. If it were only the people on here with speed control systems that were trying to convince everybody that their system was the best, I'd be arguing for the advantages of torque systems.

my 2p for what it's worth - I have an oxygen hub drive, a friend has an impulse 2 Kalkhoff, I've used both enough to know the difference. on a sunny day the SS system on the oxygen provides a kind of wave of torque that over longer distances make me work harder (unless I'm going to work and sweating is not good), averaging 25 to 30 mph and arriving at a destination after 15 miles or so thoroughly but wonderfully exhausted. If it's a rainy day and I need to get to work on a grim morning dipping below 15 mph on max assistance means not having to do much (which is a relief). on the kalkhoff everything is much slower (25 to 30mph is not possible), dipping below 15 mph isn't ever quite effort free. I suggest the OP try both. you lot are comparing apples and pears - we all have different unique requirements. choosing again, I would go for a SS - but I might choose differently if it were a 27 mph endeavour, but probably wouldn't because id have to justify spending £3k instead of £500 so it would have to be a lot better, when im really happy with the oxygen and not sure if it would feel better at all. Moral of the story is its all qualitative and personal (money aside)