I tried out a Powacycle Windsor yesterday.I rode it for about two miles,terrain flat and a few low inclines in places.I found it a lot harder on the hills that I was expecting tbh,but I am 16 stone.Also the pedals seem too far back and I had to pedal on my insteps and not on the balls of my feet.Once though I got going on the flat my little fat legs were soon doing an impression of a hamster in a wheel.I went to change up higher but I was already in 7th and top.It needed more gears imho.I took it back to the shop undecided what to do.Looking around most makes have 5 or 7 gears,why dont the manaufacturers bung a few more on,it cant cost much more?Or is there a technical issue why this cant be done?
Why no more gears?
- Thread starter Bigbee
- Start date
Yes, there is a technical reason Bigbee.
Rear hub motors cannot use the normal derailleur cassettes since their spindles are too thick, needing to incorporate cables through them.
Therefore they have to use multi sprocket freewheels which only have up to 7 sprockets and more commonly six or less, the reason being that a freewheel's bearings are inboard. Small sprockets far out mean a large twisting force on the inboard bearing bringing unreliability.
They could of course use two or three chainwheels, but designers prefer to avoid that added complication when there can already be so many controls on an e-bike's handlebars. The chainline can also be a problem, since the width of a rear motor pushes the sprockets outwards, so a two or three chainwheel set could mean mounting it wide and splaying the rider's legs.
And there's also the fact that e-bikes are generally regarded as utility bikes and not sports bikes so lower speeds are expected.
Pedalling speeds (cadence) are also an area for disagreement. You remarked on spinning like a hamster but were probably only spinning at around 60 rpm, 70 rpm at most which I would regard as comfortable. The accepted most efficient pedalling speed is in fact around 90 rpm, making hamsters look like they are asleep, so whatever gears are provided, they won't suit everyone.
However, it's also relevant that the Powacycle is one of the lowest powered e-bikes on the market, so it's worth you trying others. Powabyke make a couple of front motored models with 24 gears which would more than look after anyone's gear requirements, though I think that's OTT for an e-bike.
.
Rear hub motors cannot use the normal derailleur cassettes since their spindles are too thick, needing to incorporate cables through them.
Therefore they have to use multi sprocket freewheels which only have up to 7 sprockets and more commonly six or less, the reason being that a freewheel's bearings are inboard. Small sprockets far out mean a large twisting force on the inboard bearing bringing unreliability.
They could of course use two or three chainwheels, but designers prefer to avoid that added complication when there can already be so many controls on an e-bike's handlebars. The chainline can also be a problem, since the width of a rear motor pushes the sprockets outwards, so a two or three chainwheel set could mean mounting it wide and splaying the rider's legs.
And there's also the fact that e-bikes are generally regarded as utility bikes and not sports bikes so lower speeds are expected.
Pedalling speeds (cadence) are also an area for disagreement. You remarked on spinning like a hamster but were probably only spinning at around 60 rpm, 70 rpm at most which I would regard as comfortable. The accepted most efficient pedalling speed is in fact around 90 rpm, making hamsters look like they are asleep, so whatever gears are provided, they won't suit everyone.
However, it's also relevant that the Powacycle is one of the lowest powered e-bikes on the market, so it's worth you trying others. Powabyke make a couple of front motored models with 24 gears which would more than look after anyone's gear requirements, though I think that's OTT for an e-bike.
.
Last edited:
It would cost a bit more to add extra gears to the Powacycle, or to increase the gear range. There are no easy options to give a really good solution for the back, as the obvious solution - replace the installed 14-28 tooth freewheel with something like an 11-34 - is no longer possible because they don't make 11-34s any more.
The best way to improve it using non-obsolete components would be to put a double chainring on the front - something like a 34-50 would give you 12 gears with a very broad gear range - but would probably add £100 to the cost of the bike.
Overlapped with Flecc (again!)
The best way to improve it using non-obsolete components would be to put a double chainring on the front - something like a 34-50 would give you 12 gears with a very broad gear range - but would probably add £100 to the cost of the bike.
Overlapped with Flecc (again!)
Thanks for the quick replies.I am far from technical and all the tools in the house have my wifes name on them!Could more gears be put on if the motor was mounted centrally like the Panasonic?Im reading that Panasonic is a good motor on here?Well I think I am as most of you confuse the hell out of me with the lingo!
In theory yes, as it can use a full cassette with up to 9 sprockets on it with the excellent Panasonic motor, but in practice that wouldn't work well at the extremes as the chain line would twist from side to side too much. However, there is the SRAM DualDrive which combines a derailleur gear cassette with 8 or 9 sprockets mounted on a three speed hub give which gives 24 or 27 gears with around 21 usable. Expensive though.
There are also hub gears with up to 14 speeds that the Panasonic bikes can use, but again at a price.
Really e-bikes don't need lots of gears as long as the gear range is wide enough and the motor is powerful enough for the job, so it's best to look for the right bike that suits your needs.
.
There are also hub gears with up to 14 speeds that the Panasonic bikes can use, but again at a price.
Really e-bikes don't need lots of gears as long as the gear range is wide enough and the motor is powerful enough for the job, so it's best to look for the right bike that suits your needs.
.
I have a Salisbury and sometimes feel I would like another gear to increase my road speed without feeling like a hamster [must admit I was a bit gobsmacked at the idea of pedalling at 90 - wow] so could the double chainring suggestion work or is there a simpler way to achieve the same thing - I virtually never use the lowest gear if that affects anything.
Normally the simplest way of upping all the gears is a larger chainwheel, but I don't know the Salisbury's details there. If it's a chainring on a spider only a chainring is necessary, but if it's a one piece chainwheel, a new mounting spider and chainring would be necessary. The chainguard will also restrict how large a chainwheel could be fitted unless you remount it with more clearance.
I also don't know if the pedelec sensor ring is combined with the chainwheel, but Frank may know that offhand as he has access to a Powacycle.
The best club riders generally use a cadence of around 90, and I managed a short term peak of 113 a few months ago at 71 years old, so the Salisbury could in theory be spun up to a very respectable speed. There's a similar situation with the Panasonic unit bikes which with standard gearing cause riders to complain of spinning too fast at 16 mph, but I've happily spun them up to as much as 25 mph with standard gearing, though maintaining 20 mph is more comfortable. Higher cadences are mostly a matter of practice. Many who try it for a while find it better once they are used to it, and the stress on the joints is greatly reduced.
.
Last edited:
Thanks guys, that photo makes the idea look like a fairly straightforward process.
I do know of an engineer who just might take this on for me [I live in a town flat with no workspace or shed or I'd love to try and do it myself] but so I am clear on this - if the new chainwheel is bolted on behind the old one it should not cause a prob with the sensor - yes?
flecc, if you managed to get up to 113 I have 5 words of advice for you - avoid kryptonite at all costs!
- thinks; I must get fitter, I must get fitter ..........
I do know of an engineer who just might take this on for me [I live in a town flat with no workspace or shed or I'd love to try and do it myself] but so I am clear on this - if the new chainwheel is bolted on behind the old one it should not cause a prob with the sensor - yes?
flecc, if you managed to get up to 113 I have 5 words of advice for you - avoid kryptonite at all costs!
- thinks; I must get fitter, I must get fitter ..........
Yes, the new ring won't cause a problem as it will be well clear of that. It will just have to have the same number of arms as your chainwheel, usually four or five.
I'm quite sure you could beat my 113 cadence peak once you got used to higher cadences. Small children are the champions for high cadences though, some able to reach incredible rpm. I had a little lad of about 8 years old on a tiny bike with about 12" wheels a standard freewheel and a very small chainring determinedly racing me one day approaching the Council tip. He very gradually managed to pull ahead of me as I was doing 15 mph, his legs almost a blur. His cadence must have been well over 180, imagine that, three revs per second, mind boggling!
I'm quite sure you could beat my 113 cadence peak once you got used to higher cadences. Small children are the champions for high cadences though, some able to reach incredible rpm. I had a little lad of about 8 years old on a tiny bike with about 12" wheels a standard freewheel and a very small chainring determinedly racing me one day approaching the Council tip. He very gradually managed to pull ahead of me as I was doing 15 mph, his legs almost a blur. His cadence must have been well over 180, imagine that, three revs per second, mind boggling!
I agree you would be surprised how your cadence increases with fitness.
A year ago I used to plog along at about 60, and mainly thanks to Flecc's guidance, I realised it was better for my knees and also my lungs to pedal at a higher rate, so I tried
Out of curiousity I bought a new computer with cadence sensor for my bike and fitted it at the weekend. I was pleasantly surprised that my normal cadence on my morning commute now ranges from 80-100 - going up towards 110 on sprints or hills.
However this morning I caught up at the lights with a guy who was riding a single-speed fixed wheel bike. We set off and, although he started quickly I thought I would soon catch him as he had only one gear. I got to 20mph, and noticed my cadence was at 100. He was still going as fast as me, at a significantly higher cadence. He then pulled out and slipstreamed a passing taxi! He stayed right behind it at, perhaps, 25mph. I was in a gear of about 100" but his would have been lower, perhaps 85" - so doing some quick sums gives an estimated cadence of 147 - which he maintained for at least a quarter of a mile, until I lost sight of him!
A year ago I used to plog along at about 60, and mainly thanks to Flecc's guidance, I realised it was better for my knees and also my lungs to pedal at a higher rate, so I tried
Out of curiousity I bought a new computer with cadence sensor for my bike and fitted it at the weekend. I was pleasantly surprised that my normal cadence on my morning commute now ranges from 80-100 - going up towards 110 on sprints or hills.
However this morning I caught up at the lights with a guy who was riding a single-speed fixed wheel bike. We set off and, although he started quickly I thought I would soon catch him as he had only one gear. I got to 20mph, and noticed my cadence was at 100. He was still going as fast as me, at a significantly higher cadence. He then pulled out and slipstreamed a passing taxi! He stayed right behind it at, perhaps, 25mph. I was in a gear of about 100" but his would have been lower, perhaps 85" - so doing some quick sums gives an estimated cadence of 147 - which he maintained for at least a quarter of a mile, until I lost sight of him!
Now you've got me thinking! I used to do a lot of climbing but last year I had a pretty bad accident which saw me hanging from a rope by my leg which did a lot of damage to the muscles - result was I was laid up for quite a while and put on a fair bit of weight which I really want to lose. My tendon shrunk during the layup so climbing is out now and this is why I took up cycling.
I have been working from the idea that a slow cadence with more power is more comfortable than having my legs going faster but I'm beginning to think that I've got it wrong and perhaps I should persevere with trying to increase my cadence. Perhaps I'll invest in one of those computers and see exactly what I'm doing speed and cadence wise.
This place is a real mine of information!
I have been working from the idea that a slow cadence with more power is more comfortable than having my legs going faster but I'm beginning to think that I've got it wrong and perhaps I should persevere with trying to increase my cadence. Perhaps I'll invest in one of those computers and see exactly what I'm doing speed and cadence wise.
This place is a real mine of information!
The principle is simple Red. Pedaling at 40 rpm for 40 revs requires lets say 2 times X per pedal stroke to complete the work necessary, pedalling the same distance at 80 rpm for 80 revs requires only X per pedal stroke, so the strain on the muscles and joints for each stroke is halved.
Since these strains are not cumulative in damage causing terms, the higher the cadence the less damage the body suffers.
However, if you find that causes you any pain or stress, consult your doctor since individual conditions can influence what is best.
.
So in essence you're using cadence as a kind of extra gear - double the pace for any given distance halves the effort required - lol, it's like everything else in life; easy when you know how!
Cheers flecc, that makes up my mind on this one - I'm going to try the increased cadence route - andI can see that it would be much better from an exercise point of view as well.
Cheers flecc, that makes up my mind on this one - I'm going to try the increased cadence route - andI can see that it would be much better from an exercise point of view as well.
Not in the body building and weight lifting sense, since such expansion requires slower and long sustained muscle tensions.
That said, look at cycle road racers who always use high cadences and they hardly lack leg muscles, though their muscle lines are generally smoother rather than chunky.
.
Oh yes, that's me too. The physique of a racing snake.... albeit one that's just eaten a buffaloThanks flecc.....think id rather have a smooth looking body than a muscular tone
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
