This months issue is a good read.Very suprised at the very positive Go Cycle review,good job flecc didnt do it!
I was surprised at the Go Cycle review too. I had the impression that it was a bit of a gimmick, but the test figures are quite respectable. Don't know if the fact that they only had it for a few supervised hours had anything to do with it.
I think the fact they didn't have it very long is part of the answer, so there are things that don't add up to a real review. Referring to it as a folder, even in the conclusion is misleading. It isn't, and even the designer insists it isn't, and one would have a hard time travelling with it and attempting to collapse it for transport. The irritation that many have had at the motor noise hasn't really been reflected.
And once again, we have the riders telling us
their range as powerful cyclists rather than the true motor range which is far lower, just as happened with the Nano Brompton. Equally, as regular riders of unpowered Bromptons they are used to very high pedal cadences so have excused the GoCycle's low top gear with just a mention that it's really only a town bike. Most e-bike customers will not be so forgiving at having to spin like mad to keep with the motor or maintain decent speeds,and how many will spend well over £1000 on a bike only for town traffic use, never venturing further. In fairness to A to B, most of the intrinsic faults are mentioned, but the right emphasis on just how serious they are or can be seems lacking.
Since Velovision were only permitted a short preview test and now the same has happened with A to B, doesn't that speak volumes, when e-bike ignorant newspaper reporters have had plenty of previous access over a long period?
Yes it's got pretty styling, and yes, it's low price is remarkable for what it is, but I can't ride looks or price. I ride e-bikes and I want them to be good as e-bikes. This isn't.
.