Setting a Standard?

[Bob_about]

One last try, and then 1`m out too!

My interest in this thread went like this-

Current approaches by manufacturers and suppliers give confusing and inconsistent advice regarding range

(I posted an example where the same Wisper 905se 14Ah Sport was quoted with four different ranges on four different dealer websites, never mind comparison between brands we dont even have consistent advice regarding individual bikes)

So, perhaps the trade association along with leading manufacturers and dealers could come up with a standard means of testing so all can agree a fair and reasonable approach - lets have an on line debate about setting a standard. I joined in and watched.

Oh the niaivety of the new enthusiast! I had much to learn, certain systems are way more sophisticated than I ever imagined, comparisons with other purchases dont stack up and its a battle all round. The exasperation of it all, added to the fact that many of the senior members have probably seen it all before!

So, setting a standard seems potentially too difficult, too controversial, and maybe too expensive. I can see that now, it dissappointing, but the perfomance of hybrid means of transport certainly adds a new dimension. My recent commutes have shown me just how much variation I have on the same bike, same route depending on my mood, effort and enthusiasm. I now accept the arguments regarding how difficult this is.

But, the problem remains. On most dealer websites there is a spec list for each bike. Spot the odd one out - seat post, rims, tyres, lights, range, brakes, gears, etc. I`m used to internet shopping and detailed spec lists. I`m used to stated specifications being just that. The current approach to "sneaking" the range figure in with a detailed list of other items I can touch, feel and verify is what I object to - it gives the impression its a statement of fact like the make of tyre or number of gears, but its not - as we have been discussing - its way more complex than that.

So, a suggestion, if its so hard to agree a fair way to state range, then dont.

Simple, - dont do it at all as part of your spec lists - its not part of the spec!

Let buyers concentrate on what gears the bike has, mudgurads, suspension, brakes, warranty, dealer back up etc which are matters of fact. Then, on each BEBA dealer website add a specific link to information regarding batteries and range. Give the customer clear and fair advice about what different types of battery, sizes of battery, ways to use the battery (throttle, pedelec, hub or crank), and riding styles will impact on battery range. Within the spec lists refer to the battery link for information. Same information on all BEBA dealer websites, covering all makes of bike, all current sizes of battery, plus advice regarding battery care and lifespan.

(and yes I know some sites already have something similar, but then they confuse this good work by adding a liberal sprinkling of spurious "range guesses" into the spec lists, remember the one bike with claimed ranges of 20-50, 35, 60 and 68 miles depending on where you look)

It may even be possible for the BEBA to draft such a set of advice, consult on the wording (even on here?!) and have something we can all feel is reasonable and helpful. Then lets leave the bikes to speak for themselves; the batteries continue to get bigger and better; and the best advice anyone can recieve to be to try before you buy at your local BEBA approved dealer.

Think thats my two, three and fourpenneth added!

Thanks for reading my babblings

Goodnight

 

[Patrick]

But, the problem remains. On most dealer websites there is a spec list for each bike. Spot the odd one out - seat post, rims, tyres, lights, range, brakes, gears, etc. ...The current approach to "sneaking" the range figure in with a detailed list of other items I can touch, feel and verify is what I object to - it gives the impression its a statement of fact like the make of tyre or number of gears, but its not - as we have been discussing - its way more complex than that.

The problem with not including the range is that it's such a basic question for someone thinking about buying an e-bike.

Instead of taking it off the list I'd rather see a note on the same page saying how the quoted range was calculated and what conditions would reduce the range. This would also be the ideal place to add the "of course you can always extend the range as much as you legs can cope with" note.

This would allow sellers to show the bikes in their best light on conditions that they say exactly what that best light is.

 

[flecc]

Instead of taking it off the list I'd rather see a note on the same page saying how the quoted range was calculated and what conditions would reduce the range. This would also be the ideal place to add the "of course you can always extend the range as much as you legs can cope with" note.

This would allow sellers to show the bikes in their best light on conditions that they say exactly what that best light is.

Like this sentence from my review and test of the Kalkhoff Agattu:

It's always very difficult to predict ranges for others, but with power left on most of the time, and across the spectrum from rather heavy rider with hills, to very fit regular cyclist in easy territory, ranges should span from 30 to 50 miles.

That way someone can assess where they fit in that spectrum, personally and for their territory.
.

 

[Alex728]

I agree Tony, I just feel we should be giving electric bike riders so form of advice regarding range that can be accepted by all.

If we were to use a local cycle club to do the testing for us asking for 10 or so equally fit people and then drew lots to determine which bike was ridden by which rider we may be able to make the first steps to making a standard.

Regards

David

but you will then just get people at the fitter end of the scale (cycling clubs being full of 'em) and higher ranges which the less fit people will then claim are exaggerated!

I would say that a 905SE with 14 AH battery is capable of at least 30 miles on full power and throttle with a bigger rider, and about 50+ if ridden with less assistance (such as on pedelec only...)

 

[onmebike]

There is absolutely no point in having a result for a single set of test conditions when the real world usage conditions are infinitely variable. It helps nobody. I think I'll stop reading this thread as its completely exasperating.

I wonder how ebike manufacturer's chose their component's with such real world infinite variable's to contend with?
Had they listened to you, they would have given up without question.
Infinitely variable is not without it's limit's. Those limit's are measurable.
Panasonic, I'm informed, used the human model for the design of it's ebike.
To suit the wide range of end user and condition's, it's doubtful they used extreme's of human capability or condition's, rather somewhere around middle ground. A one size fit's all approach.
All I'm suggesting is, if the manufacturer can determine the requirement's for ebike suitability, it's not beyond technology to devise a mean's of measuring that suitability. If the only way is one set of test condition's, so be it.
I think we're all capable of working out the fact that the over weight and unfit riding uphill in a headwind will fall short of the test result's. Well, maybe not you.
There would be absolutely no point to this forum, if we all shared your, or anyone else's opinion.
As you say, you don't have to participate.

 

[NRG]

Thank you for clearing up a doubt I had from reading your posts earlier in the thread.

 

[flecc]

Panasonic, I'm informed, used the human model for the design of it's ebike.
To suit the wide range of end user and condition's, it's doubtful they used extreme's of human capability or condition's, rather somewhere around middle ground. A one size fit's all approach.

..........................

 

[onmebike]

Thank you for clearing up a doubt I had from reading your posts earlier in the thread.

If its personal, you can pm me?

 

[onmebike]

View attachment 1297

..........................

Nice one flecc,
If they used this test model we'd all get better than test result figure's and nobody would have reason for complaint.
Maybe thats the answer, manufacturers quote worst scenario figure's and tell us to expect better.

 

[BertYardbrush]

The crux of this whole most interesting debate is that the punter wants to know how long he's going to go before his battery needs recharging and how long before the battery needs replacing.

Flecc, don't smash your screen as I say this.

Surely any benchmark is better than none and it cannot be beyond the wit of man to come up with a meaningful way of expressing how much energy it takes under specified controlled conditions to drain a battery and to convert that information to standard hypothetical conditions to give a battery range.

I think that battery price is stalling the growth of the market and standard battery sizes will encourage the development of cheaper batteries. The manufacturers of bikes will howl like Epson howls about using using other inks in their printers. [How much would it cost to fill a swimming pool with Epson ink?]

 

[Alex728]

I think that battery price is stalling the growth of the market and standard battery sizes will encourage the development of cheaper batteries.

in the long run that might be the case, but perhaps its worth considering that at present, the perceived "lock-in" and profit made on replacement batteries is factored into the profitability of e-bike companies when they are seeking investment, and its that which funds the R & D and customer service?

at present its not like printers where there are hundreds of different models in a ruthlessly competitive market, there are only a few e-bike companies and at least two British ones have suffered serious financial losses recently - one having a management change and another luckily being able to cross-subsidise the losses from other business units...

I don't think the battery price is actually that much of a factor when there are push bikes costing way more than the most expensive e-bike which are still selling, and some of the consumable components on these bikes are also pricey!

I've noticed it seems harder to source replacement batteries for the cheaper bikes, although its not impossible to swap over the innards of these batteries if you have electronics skills (I also noticed Blew It actually has a fire extinguisher on his workbench!)

what I think is stalling the market is perceived issues with reliability and access to customer service and repairs, particularly with many LBS's being scornful about e-bikes in general..

 

[flecc]

Flecc, don't smash your screen as I say this.

Surely any benchmark is better than none and it cannot be beyond the wit of man to come up with a meaningful way of expressing how much energy it takes under specified controlled conditions to drain a battery and to convert that information to standard hypothetical conditions to give a battery range.

I wouldn't do that!

To do this you have to answer how to represent the ratio of human ability, which is as much as 5 to 1. Whatever you chose within that range of abilities would only match around 20% of the population.

In any case, even that option isn't possible for systems that have to have a human rider on board to work as designed, how does one measure a consistent level of human cycling ability for all manufacturers in all circumstances. As I and others have remarked, they'd all use a superfit individual and the results would be of no use to anyone.

Then as someone else remarked, there's the hill climbing where weight becomes to crucial factor. On an e-bike, unlike any motor vehicle, the operator weight is the majority by far so drastically alters performance and range. A 20 stone person's hill climb steepness ability on a given bike is only just over half that of a 10 stone man, even if both are equally fit (unlikely).

Also, in a flat area that weight difference will make little difference to range, while in a very hilly area the range could be almost halved for the 20 stone person.

I'll say this now as an absolute, one cannot produce useful single figures for all weights of persons, all fitness of persons and all terrains with e-bikes. The differences are at least 2 to 1 on both range and hill climb ability and often very much greater.

It's only possible to give upper and lower figures as a rough guide, leaving the consumer to relate those to their own personal circumstances.

It is of course possible to produce charts for each combination of characteristics, but experience shows that consumers are not very good at using those.
.

 

[rog_london]

Not wishing this to be taken too seriously, but we could settle upon a statistically average e-bike rider taken from the membership of this forum - perhaps the wrong side of 60, the wrong side of 15 stone, and with a strong liking for beer and pies.

Based on that, we might get a meaningful comparison between different manufacturers' e-bikes - the weight of the bike would probably not make a huge difference, but the width of the saddle might.

Calm down dear, it's only a commercial....

Rog.

 

[flecc]

Continuing from my above posting, you might be interested in a precisely calculated chart of percentage hill climb ability for three different eZee e-bikes with differing riders that I posted in here over two years ago. That shows a variation for each model of almost 2.5 to 1 across rider abilities:


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%
.
.

 

[flecc]

the weight of the bike would probably not make a huge difference

See my previous two posts, weight makes a huge difference on hills with e-bikes.
.

 

[rog_london]

See my previous two posts, weight makes a huge difference on hills with e-bikes.
.

That's not quite what I said -I was referring to the weight of the BIKE not the bike plus rider - and I was being facetious in any case. I have no reason to believe that the average member is over 60 or over 15 stone.

I'm 5/6 of the way there myself - over 60 and 10 stone! There, you see what rubbish statistics can be. It's the way you tell 'em.

Rog.

 

[BertYardbrush]

I don't think the battery price is actually that much of a factor ..

For ebikes to be a success,you need a reasonable second hand market, that's the time when you need cheap batteries. If you're paying up to £500 for a pre-loved bike and then have to fork out £400 for a replacement battery it turns the transaction into a bit of a no-no.

 

[onmebike]

Continuing from my above posting, you might be interested in a precisely calculated chart of percentage hill climb ability for three different eZee e-bikes with differing riders that I posted in here over two years ago. That shows a variation for each model of almost 2.5 to 1 across rider abilities:


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%
.
.

The Quando has highest percentage in all example's. Doesn't this therefore compute into Rider weight, age, fitness and ability being immaterial? This kind of information is what the consumer need's together with,

It's only possible to give upper and lower figures as a rough guide, leaving the consumer to relate those to their own personal circumstances.

I could then make an informed choice.

 

[Lloyd]

in the long run that might be the case, but perhaps its worth considering that at present, the perceived "lock-in" and profit made on replacement batteries is factored into the profitability of e-bike companies when they are seeking investment, and its that which funds the R & D and customer service?

at present its not like printers where there are hundreds of different models in a ruthlessly competitive market, there are only a few e-bike companies and at least two British ones have suffered serious financial losses recently - one having a management change and another luckily being able to cross-subsidise the losses from other business units...

I don't think the battery price is actually that much of a factor when there are push bikes costing way more than the most expensive e-bike which are still selling, and some of the consumable components on these bikes are also pricey!

I've noticed it seems harder to source replacement batteries for the cheaper bikes, although its not impossible to swap over the innards of these batteries if you have electronics skills (I also noticed Blew It actually has a fire extinguisher on his workbench!)

what I think is stalling the market is perceived issues with reliability and access to customer service and repairs, particularly with many LBS's being scornful about e-bikes in general..

I think you have hit the nail on the head there Alex. Wouldn't it be great if that was to change in the near future..........

 

[rog_london]

I think you have hit the nail on the head there Alex. Wouldn't it be great if that was to change in the near future..........

Not just the LBSs are scornful - we seem to occupy a slightly uncomfortable no-mans-land somewhere between 'real' cyclists (who don't cheat) and mobility scooters....

I know not everyone sees it that way, but sometimes it does get under one's skin. I'm not worried about the attitude of the LBS from my own viewpoint as it's unlikely anything could go wrong that I couldn't fix - but of course many of us are less fortunate than that.

There's a lot of one-upmanship in 'sport' cycling, and I suspect that many of the clubs are more than slightly elitist, and that we're often viewed as an abomination.

I can't see us ever getting to any sort of 'critical mass' where e-bikes become main stream. Most people wanting some power would just buy a moped/scooter/small motorbike. You've really got to WANT to ride an e-bike.

Rog.