Trex....at times you do talk a load of unsubstantiated rubbish...on what basis are you able to make the statement 'do keep in mind that hub bikes are less energy efficient than crank drive bikes'....I know of no comparable testing that supports that statement? Do you? It may be that the crank drive system experiences greater energy losses because it has to drive through the gear system of the bike whereas the hub drives directly into the wheel...to be honest I dont know?And I suspect nor do you?
Where do you get your comment that Bosch is not more energy efficient than the Woosh CD,quote'they expect you to put more effort in'...how do you know that the Bosch system is not more energy efficient? I must say that every Bosch motored bike I have ridden is very smooth,I never felt that I was putting more effort in,I am sure the millions that it cost to develop the Bosch system,they must have considered efficiency in their R&D.
I think Jimod 'Scottish hillclimb challenge' although done informally verifies that in order of hillclimbing ability.
1. Kudos Typhoon
2. Kudos Tourer
3. Woosh CD
Your quote'without the BPM motors,hub bikes cannot compete on hills',yet Jim reckons that his old Tourer bike with an 8 fun motor beat the Santana CD up his hill.
What do you mean by 'semi legal',you can't have semi legal..its either legal or illegal? There are not grey areas when it comes to legality?So is it legal or illegal?
Your quote'bikes with BPM are over the top in terms of appropriate helpful power for e-bikes' I have repeatedly asked the question which BPM motored e-bike have you ridden, that allows you to make such a statement,I suspect you have never ridden one,please advise?
So are you saying that crank drive bikes with little power are better because the BPM is too powerful? I am sorry I have never sold any e-bike to any customer who has said that he felt that the power was 'over the top',most of the postings on this forum seek more hillclimbing ability not less...after all you can always turn down the PAS!!!
The BPM motor was specifically developed to move the maximum torque further down in the speed range-in reality all these motors are powering under load at about 600 watts plus,if you look on the King meter on any of these bikes(hub or crank drive) you will see such a battery load in excess of 600 watts.
So the BPM motor exhibits the torque at exactly the situation you need it,up steep hills at low speed-it gives you the opportunity to get into a higher speed when the motor will work at closer to its optimum speed,put another way 'you overcome the hump'. The greatest energy wastage comes when these bikes are working at a speed that wastes energy in the form of heat rather than translating that energy into motion,I suspect that the low speed high torque characteristics of the BPM are very energy efficient because the motor is more often working at a speed delivering peak torque.
Perhaps Jim could advise on the range he is achieving with his 3 bikes,that would be an interesting comparison.?
Kudos Typhoon....BPM motor,derailleur gears
Kudos Tourer....8 fun motor,I can't remember whether its Nexus or derailleur
Woosh CD....TCM crank drive,derailleur gears.
Which one delivers the best range?
KudosDave