Any success with add on electric motors to Conventional Bikes?

[TBerk]

I ask because I saw two different bikes (with what looked like two
different motors) in one day. Kind of surprising to see two in about
an hour's span.

Seems a good design might place a small motor behind the seat pole
near the back brake area w/ some batteries slim packed into the
triangle above the pedal cranks; keeps it low and if slim enough the
only side affect other than over all weight might be sail effect from
cross winds.


TBerk

[Brian Huntley]

On Apr 26, 11:38 am, TBerk <bayareab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I ask because I saw two different bikes (with what looked like two
> different motors) in one day. Kind of surprising to see two in about
> an hour's span.
>
> Seems a good design might place a small motor behind the seat pole
> near the back brake area w/ some batteries slim packed into the
> triangle above the pedal cranks; keeps it low and if slim enough the
> only side affect other than over all weight might be sail effect from
> cross winds.

I've never done it myself, but the only truly successful electric add-
ons to conventional bikes I've seen and heard about have been hub
motors, where you basically swap in a new wheel. A bit pricier than a
"Solex" type friction drive, I expect, but they don't chew up your
tires. And the wattages they're available at mean real acceleration
and hill climbing.

[Chalo]

TBerk wrote:
>
> I ask because I saw two different bikes (with what looked like two
> different motors) in one day. Kind of surprising to see two in about
> an hour's span.

http://crystalyte.com/
http://bionx.ca/
http://www.cyclone-usa.com/
http://www.izipusa.com/
http://goldenmotor.com/

http://ebikes.ca/
http://electricrider.com/

http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=3
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/e-motor-assist/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/power-assist/

> Seems a good design might place a small motor behind the seat pole
> near the back brake area w/ some batteries slim packed into the
> triangle above the pedal cranks;

There's not all that much room there, and potential chain lines to a
rear wheel sprocket are likely to foul the frame. I ride a 27"
frame-- just about the largest factory-made size-- and I was unable to
fit a motor with reduction chain drive there when I built my first e-
bike. I eventually mounted the motor just under the bike's downtube,
with the chain running above and below the left side of the bottom
bracket spindle.

Stokemonkey mounts where you suggest, but it drives the crank, and it
only fits an Xtracycle-equipped bike:

http://cleverchimp.com/products/stokemonkey/

Chalo

[Chalo]

TBerk wrote:
>
> I ask because I saw two different bikes (with what looked like two
> different motors) in one day. Kind of surprising to see two in about
> an hour's span.

http://crystalyte.com/
http://bionx.ca/
http://www.cyclone-usa.com/
http://www.izipusa.com/
http://goldenmotor.com/

http://ebikes.ca/
http://electricrider.com/

http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=3
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/e-motor-assist/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/power-assist/

> Seems a good design might place a small motor behind the seat pole
> near the back brake area w/ some batteries slim packed into the
> triangle above the pedal cranks;

There's not all that much room there, and potential chain lines to a
rear wheel sprocket are likely to foul the frame. I ride a 27"
frame-- just about the largest factory-made size-- and I was unable to
fit a motor with reduction chain drive there when I built my first e-
bike. I eventually mounted the motor just under the bike's downtube,
with the chain running above and below the left side of the bottom
bracket spindle.

Stokemonkey mounts where you suggest, but it drives the crank, and it
only fits an Xtracycle-equipped bike:

http://cleverchimp.com/products/stokemonkey/

Chalo

[Dan Burkhart]

TBerk Wrote:
> I ask because I saw two different bikes (with what looked like two
> different motors) in one day. Kind of surprising to see two in about
> an hour's span.
>
> Seems a good design might place a small motor behind the seat pole
> near the back brake area w/ some batteries slim packed into the
> triangle above the pedal cranks; keeps it low and if slim enough the
> only side affect other than over all weight might be sail effect from
> cross winds.
>
>
> TBerk
The easiest conversion is a front hub motor. I installed this one, a
Wilderness Energy 450 watt brushless in my wife's bike.
http://i32.tinypic.com/359b7eu.jpg
It worked well. lots of power and range, but I did not care for how it
affected the handling of the bike. The weight of the hub seemed to cause
a lot of flexing in the fork,and made what had been a nice,light
handling bike in to a clumsy tank.
I improved it somewhat by swapping in a cheapo suspension fork.
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2cr2jb9&s=3
I was concerned about the ability of the fork dropouts to withstand
the torque of the axle over the long term, so I fabricated these tabs to
re-enforce them.
http://i28.tinypic.com/x55he9.jpg
It complicates wheel removal,of course, but it's worth it for a bit of
peace of mind.
All in all, it has worked well for the two years she has been using
it, the only problem arising from moisture permeating the controller. A
good dose of WD40
looked after that.
I know it's not the best system out there, but it's ok for the price.
Dan Burkhart
www.boomerbicycle.ca


--
Dan Burkhart

[Ron Ruff]

There are a lot of good ways to integrate electric power into light
vehicles for getting around town. The problem is that our system still
promotes the "bigger and more expensive is better (and safer)"
paradigm. If we could start making the streets safe and easy for bikes
and light vehicles, instead of designing everything for 6,000 lb SUVs,
this would be a no-brainer.

[Nate Nagel]

Brian Huntley wrote:
> On Apr 26, 11:38 am, TBerk <bayareab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I ask because I saw two different bikes (with what looked like two
>>different motors) in one day. Kind of surprising to see two in about
>>an hour's span.
>>
>>Seems a good design might place a small motor behind the seat pole
>>near the back brake area w/ some batteries slim packed into the
>>triangle above the pedal cranks; keeps it low and if slim enough the
>>only side affect other than over all weight might be sail effect from
>>cross winds.
>
>
> I've never done it myself, but the only truly successful electric add-
> ons to conventional bikes I've seen and heard about have been hub
> motors, where you basically swap in a new wheel. A bit pricier than a
> "Solex" type friction drive, I expect, but they don't chew up your
> tires. And the wattages they're available at mean real acceleration
> and hill climbing.

That would be a GREAT application for some hybrid-car-esque software and
regen braking...

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

[Bill Bushnell]

Brian Huntley <brian_huntley@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I've never done it myself, but the only truly successful electric add-
> ons to conventional bikes I've seen and heard about have been hub
> motors, where you basically swap in a new wheel.

Hub motors make for a relatively easy installation, but if you ride in varied
terrain, a geared motor will offer greater overall efficiency.

I am partial to the Stokemonkey design, although on a conventional bike with
limited space, the smaller Cyclone motor might be easier to install.

I have a couple of projects on recumbents, one of which uses a Cyclone motor in
the style of a Stokemonkey, where the motor drives a sprocket on the left crank,
allowing the operator to run the motor through all of the bike's gears.

http://tinyurl.com/55fnkc

--
Bill Bushnell
http://pobox.com/~bushnell/

[Chalo]

Nate Nagel wrote:
>
> Brian Huntley wrote:
> >
> > I've never done it myself, but the only truly successful electric add-
> > ons to conventional bikes I've seen and heard about have been hub
> > motors, where you basically swap in a new wheel.
>
> That would be a GREAT application for some hybrid-car-esque software and
> regen braking...

Some of them are direct drive with high pole count armatures, and
regen makes some sense for those. Geared hub motors use one-way
clutches, just like we do on our pedal drivetrains-- because for a
bike, the ability to coast freely does a lot more for you than the
ability to recapture braking energy.

Chalo

[N8N]

On Apr 27, 10:16*am, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
> > Brian Huntley wrote:
>
> > > I've never done it myself, but the only truly successful electric add-
> > > ons to conventional bikes I've seen and heard about have been hub
> > > motors, where you basically swap in a new wheel.
>
> > That would be a GREAT application for some hybrid-car-esque software and
> > regen braking...
>
> Some of them are direct drive with high pole count armatures, and
> regen makes some sense for those. *Geared hub motors use one-way
> clutches, just like we do on our pedal drivetrains-- because for a
> bike, the ability to coast freely does a lot more for you than the
> ability to recapture braking energy.
>
> Chalo

I was envisioning something completely integrated - e.g. redesigned
brake levers incorporating a potentiometer that controls the regen
braking through the first portion of the pull, and then engages the
actual brakes in the second portion of the pull, that would allow the
bike to completely freewheel down hills if you wanted to build up
speed without pedaling. Certainly not cheap nor easy but would be a
cool idea if someone really wanted to work it out.

nate

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article
<449d4cbc-5d11-4f5b-b05e-0db78fa9cf81@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:

> TBerk wrote:
> >
> > I ask because I saw two different bikes (with what looked like two
> > different motors) in one day. Kind of surprising to see two in about
> > an hour's span.

> > Seems a good design might place a small motor behind the seat pole
> > near the back brake area w/ some batteries slim packed into the
> > triangle above the pedal cranks;
>
> There's not all that much room there, and potential chain lines to a
> rear wheel sprocket are likely to foul the frame. I ride a 27"
> frame-- just about the largest factory-made size-- and I was unable to
> fit a motor with reduction chain drive there when I built my first e-
> bike. I eventually mounted the motor just under the bike's downtube,
> with the chain running above and below the left side of the bottom
> bracket spindle.

I saw a homebrew with a clever-looking mount: heavy-duty custom rack
carrying an electric motor directly above the rear wheel. Chain drive
from the motor down to the non-drive side of the hub, where there was a
second freewheel for the motor drive.

I believe the rider was using a LHD BMX cog on the hub, and I assume
(with no certainty) he was using some flavor of flip-flop hub.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[mark@drumbent.com]

On Apr 27, 10:55 am, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote:
> TBerk wrote:
>
> > I ask because I saw two different bikes (with what looked like two
> > different motors) in one day. Kind of surprising to see two in about
> > an hour's span.
>
> http://crystalyte.com/http://bionx.ca/http://www.cyclone-usa.com/http://www.izipusa.com/http://goldenmotor.com/
>

The Bionx is a very cool system, but that's probably just because it's
Canadian. ;) But seriously, it's well thought out, and has regen and
anti-theft (computer goes into 200% regen, which makes the bike almost
impossible to pedal away, while the battery can also easily unlock and
be removed). But it's a pricey system. The interesting news is that
Bionx recently got bought by Magna International, a major auto systems
manufacturer, so that says something...

After pedaling my cargo trike for two years and occasionally just
about popping my heart out of my chest on hills I added a Wilderness
Energy kit:

http://drumbent.blogspot.com/2006/07/cargo-trike-gets-some-help.html

A year after that the battery pack was upgraded from 36V to 48V:

http://drumbent.blogspot.com/2007/05/trike-gets-another-boost.html

http://drumbent.blogspot.com/2007/10/update-to-battery-pack-upgrade.html

My friend Juergen, who did the welding on the trike, also supplies
assist systems and Xtracycles. His website is:

http://acclivity.ca/electric_bike.html

Mark

[JennyB]

On Apr 27, 3:56*pm, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Stokemonkey mounts where you suggest, but it drives the crank, and it
> only fits an Xtracycle-equipped bike:
>
> http://cleverchimp.com/products/stokemonkey/
>
The retro-fit market is still rapidly developing and plagued with
supply problems. Cleverchimp have not been taking any more orders for
the last six months. I am very impressed with the concept, and will be
getting an Xtracycle with a view no either ordering one when they
become available again, or else building the equivalent.

Bottom bracket motors will always be tricky to retrofit, but hub
motors work well enough if you don't need extreme gear range. Another
project to watch for is

http://practicalpedal.com/electricbike/

[JennyB]

On Apr 27, 3:56 pm, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Stokemonkey mounts where you suggest, but it drives the crank, and it
> only fits an Xtracycle-equipped bike:
>
> http://cleverchimp.com/products/stokemonkey/
>
The retro-fit market is still rapidly developing and plagued with
supply problems. Cleverchimp have not been taking any more orders for
the last six months. I am very impressed with the concept, and will be
getting an Xtracycle with a view no either ordering one when they
become available again, or else building the equivalent.

Bottom bracket motors will always be tricky to retrofit, but hub
motors work well enough if you don't need extreme gear range. Another
project to watch for is

http://practicalpedal.com/electricbike/

[DougC]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> ...
> I saw a homebrew with a clever-looking mount: heavy-duty custom rack
> carrying an electric motor directly above the rear wheel. Chain drive
> from the motor down to the non-drive side of the hub, where there was a
> second freewheel for the motor drive.
>
> I believe the rider was using a LHD BMX cog on the hub, and I assume
> (with no certainty) he was using some flavor of flip-flop hub.
>

Did it really have freewheels on BOTH sides? Or just sprockets on both
sides?... A number of kits use a chain drive on the left side, but the
sprocket on the wheel is just bolted on, literally through the spokes.
The engine drive side normally just spins all the time.

There are people who use a disk brake hub, and bolt a sprocket to the
disk mount. Also at least one company has made a double-drive hub, with
the normal freewheel on the right and a bolted-on "stationary" sprocket
on the left (Staton kits have these).

Motorized-bike people have been wishing for a double-freewheel hub for a
/long/ time, and I'd not heard of any in production. There are flip-flop
BMX hubs that can take freewheels on both sides but I was informed
(here, quite possibly) that the threading is the same direction on both
sides--so the left side can't be used for driving, unless it's flipped
over to the right.
~

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <656Rj.185$087.164@newsfe07.lga>,
DougC <dcimper@norcom2000.com> wrote:

> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > ...
> > I saw a homebrew with a clever-looking mount: heavy-duty custom rack
> > carrying an electric motor directly above the rear wheel. Chain drive
> > from the motor down to the non-drive side of the hub, where there was a
> > second freewheel for the motor drive.
> >
> > I believe the rider was using a LHD BMX cog on the hub, and I assume
> > (with no certainty) he was using some flavor of flip-flop hub.
> >
>
> Did it really have freewheels on BOTH sides? Or just sprockets on both
> sides?... A number of kits use a chain drive on the left side, but the
> sprocket on the wheel is just bolted on, literally through the spokes.
> The engine drive side normally just spins all the time.

I dug up my photos to review the evidence. It's definitely a LHD
freewheel. Indeed, the drive side uses a multi-speed freewheel.

<http://www.flickr.com/photos/rcousine/2448067142/>

> There are people who use a disk brake hub, and bolt a sprocket to the
> disk mount. Also at least one company has made a double-drive hub, with
> the normal freewheel on the right and a bolted-on "stationary" sprocket
> on the left (Staton kits have these).
>
> Motorized-bike people have been wishing for a double-freewheel hub for a
> /long/ time, and I'd not heard of any in production. There are flip-flop
> BMX hubs that can take freewheels on both sides but I was informed
> (here, quite possibly) that the threading is the same direction on both
> sides--so the left side can't be used for driving, unless it's flipped
> over to the right.

Motorized bike people need to pay more attention to obscure BMX parts,
where the Left-Hand Drive exists:

<https://www.jrbicycles.com/storefront/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=6
54>

The purpose of these off-side drives, aside from looking cool, is to let
riders who prefer to do coping grinds on the right-hand side to do so
unimpeded.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[me@privacy.net]

Dan Burkhart
<Dan.Burkhart.38jzpb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
wrote:

>The easiest conversion is a front hub motor. I installed this one, a
>Wilderness Energy 450 watt brushless in my wife's bike.
>http://i32.tinypic.com/359b7eu.jpg


How is it working now?

Does she us it every day ?

[Dan Burkhart]

Ryan Cousineau Wrote:
> In article <656Rj.185$087.164@newsfe07.lga>,
> DougC <dcimper@norcom2000.com> wrote:
>
> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > > ...
> > > I saw a homebrew with a clever-looking mount: heavy-duty custom
> rack
> > > carrying an electric motor directly above the rear wheel. Chain
> drive
> > > from the motor down to the non-drive side of the hub, where there
> was a
> > > second freewheel for the motor drive.
> > >
> > > I believe the rider was using a LHD BMX cog on the hub, and I
> assume
> > > (with no certainty) he was using some flavor of flip-flop hub.
> > >
> >
> > Did it really have freewheels on BOTH sides? Or just sprockets on
> both
> > sides?... A number of kits use a chain drive on the left side, but
> the
> > sprocket on the wheel is just bolted on, literally through the
> spokes.
> > The engine drive side normally just spins all the time.
>
> I dug up my photos to review the evidence. It's definitely a LHD
> freewheel. Indeed, the drive side uses a multi-speed freewheel.
>
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/rcousine/2448067142/>
>
> > There are people who use a disk brake hub, and bolt a sprocket to
> the
> > disk mount. Also at least one company has made a double-drive hub,
> with
> > the normal freewheel on the right and a bolted-on "stationary"
> sprocket
> > on the left (Staton kits have these).
> >
> > Motorized-bike people have been wishing for a double-freewheel hub
> for a
> > /long/ time, and I'd not heard of any in production. There are
> flip-flop
> > BMX hubs that can take freewheels on both sides but I was informed
> > (here, quite possibly) that the threading is the same direction on
> both
> > sides--so the left side can't be used for driving, unless it's
> flipped
> > over to the right.
>
> Motorized bike people need to pay more attention to obscure BMX parts,
> where the Left-Hand Drive exists:
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/3kntpc
> 54>
>
> The purpose of these off-side drives, aside from looking cool, is to
> let
> riders who prefer to do coping grinds on the right-hand side to do so
> unimpeded.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
> "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

I have a bike on my floor with a left side freewheel driven by a
Currie motor. and a 7 speed freewheel on the right.If you have seen the
Schwinn e-bike that Canadian Tire sells, it is exactly the same machine
with the Mongoose brand on it. I think the reason I have been unable to
sell it is the fact that it is such a piece of crap I cannot bring
myself to talk it up.
I've offered it cheap just to get rid of it, but it's still here.
Dan Burkhart
www.boomerbicycle.ca


--
Dan Burkhart

[Dan Burkhart]

me@privacy.net Wrote:
> Dan Burkhart
> <Dan.Burkhart.38jzpb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
> wrote:
>
> >The easiest conversion is a front hub motor. I installed this one, a
> >Wilderness Energy 450 watt brushless in my wife's bike.
> >http://i32.tinypic.com/359b7eu.jpg
>
>
> How is it working now?
>
> Does she us it every day ?

It works fine. It only gets used for Sunday rides.
Dan Burkhart
www.boomerbicycle.ca


--
Dan Burkhart

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <Dan.Burkhart.38kutb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>,
Dan Burkhart <Dan.Burkhart.38kutb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
wrote:

> Ryan Cousineau Wrote:
> > In article <656Rj.185$087.164@newsfe07.lga>,
> > DougC <dcimper@norcom2000.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > I saw a homebrew with a clever-looking mount: heavy-duty custom
> > rack
> > > > carrying an electric motor directly above the rear wheel. Chain
> > drive
> > > > from the motor down to the non-drive side of the hub, where there
> > was a
> > > > second freewheel for the motor drive.
> > > >
> > > > I believe the rider was using a LHD BMX cog on the hub, and I
> > assume
> > > > (with no certainty) he was using some flavor of flip-flop hub.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Did it really have freewheels on BOTH sides? Or just sprockets on
> > both
> > > sides?... A number of kits use a chain drive on the left side, but
> > the
> > > sprocket on the wheel is just bolted on, literally through the
> > spokes.
> > > The engine drive side normally just spins all the time.
> >
> > I dug up my photos to review the evidence. It's definitely a LHD
> > freewheel. Indeed, the drive side uses a multi-speed freewheel.
> >
> > <http://www.flickr.com/photos/rcousine/2448067142/>
> >
> > > There are people who use a disk brake hub, and bolt a sprocket to
> > the
> > > disk mount. Also at least one company has made a double-drive hub,
> > with
> > > the normal freewheel on the right and a bolted-on "stationary"
> > sprocket
> > > on the left (Staton kits have these).
> > >
> > > Motorized-bike people have been wishing for a double-freewheel hub
> > for a
> > > /long/ time, and I'd not heard of any in production. There are
> > flip-flop
> > > BMX hubs that can take freewheels on both sides but I was informed
> > > (here, quite possibly) that the threading is the same direction on
> > both
> > > sides--so the left side can't be used for driving, unless it's
> > flipped
> > > over to the right.
> >
> > Motorized bike people need to pay more attention to obscure BMX parts,
> > where the Left-Hand Drive exists:
> >
> > <http://tinyurl.com/3kntpc
> > 54>
> >
> > The purpose of these off-side drives, aside from looking cool, is to
> > let
> > riders who prefer to do coping grinds on the right-hand side to do so
> > unimpeded.
> >
> > --
> > Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
> > "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> > "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
>
> I have a bike on my floor with a left side freewheel driven by a
> Currie motor. and a 7 speed freewheel on the right.If you have seen the
> Schwinn e-bike that Canadian Tire sells, it is exactly the same machine
> with the Mongoose brand on it. I think the reason I have been unable to
> sell it is the fact that it is such a piece of crap I cannot bring
> myself to talk it up.
> I've offered it cheap just to get rid of it, but it's still here.
> Dan Burkhart
> www.boomerbicycle.ca

Either you like the rest of your floor stock better, or I'd like a copy
of your closeout catalog! :).

For those curious, here's the Canadian Tire Schwinn:

<http://www.canadiantire.ca/browse/product_detail.jsp?PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id
=845524443296291&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=1408474396672077&bmUID=12094308186
69>

It is rather Goldbergian.

Does the LHD motor connect to a freewheel on the hub, or does it
drag/regenerate (fixed cog) when not powering the bike? Any interesting
details about the parts? I assume the hub is some rather underspecified
flip/flop freewheel hub, possibly using a part originally made for a
tandem with a thread-on drum brake.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[Chalo]

N8N wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
> >
> > Some of them are direct drive with high pole count armatures, and
> > regen makes some sense for those. Geared hub motors use one-way
> > clutches, just like we do on our pedal drivetrains-- because for a
> > bike, the ability to coast freely does a lot more for you than the
> > ability to recapture braking energy.
>
> I was envisioning something completely integrated - e.g. redesigned
> brake levers incorporating a potentiometer that controls the regen
> braking through the first portion of the pull, and then engages the
> actual brakes in the second portion of the pull, that would allow the
> bike to completely freewheel down hills if you wanted to build up
> speed without pedaling. Certainly not cheap nor easy but would be a
> cool idea if someone really wanted to work it out.

Rabbit Tool made a system with a two-way throttle, which could be
rolled back for acceleration or rolled forward for progressive regen
braking. It was a good idea in principle, but Sanyo opted to put in a
one-way clutch in the design after they bought it rather than using
regen.

http://www.rabbittool.com/

There is enough drag in a permanent magnet motor, even when it's not
under power, that backdriving it amounts to a major energy loss. An e-
bike system therefore would have to include both a one-way clutch and
an on-demand two-way clutch in order to have both regen and free
coasting. As a bonus, the two-way clutch would allow powered reverse
drive, which is useful for a trike.

Electromagnetic braking has the advantage of being inherently anti-
lock in most circumstances.

Chalo

[me@privacy.net]

JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> wrote:

>Bottom bracket motors will always be tricky to retrofit, but hub
>motors work well enough if you don't need extreme gear range. Another
>project to watch for is
>
>http://practicalpedal.com/electricbike/

Interesting!!

But cant find much info or pics on it!!

[Chalo]

JennyB wrote:
>
> >http://cleverchimp.com/products/stokemonkey/
>
> The retro-fit market is still rapidly developing and plagued with
> supply problems. Cleverchimp have not been taking any more orders for
> the last six months. I am very impressed with the concept, and will be
> getting an Xtracycle with a view no either ordering one when they
> become available again, or else building the equivalent.

My impression is that Stokemonkey production has been forestalled
pending some plausible way to make it meet the legal definition of an
electric assist bike (which in most of the USA means that is would
have to be incapable of traveling faster than 20mph on motor power
alone). It arguably already does this because the motor can only
apply power when the pedals are in motion. But all you have to do to
demonstrate that it is a non-compliant bike is remove feet from pedals
while motoring at over 20mph.

Here in Austin, sit-down e-scooters that have no pedals and can easily
exceed 20mph get a free pass from the cops, I guess because the
authorities like them better than the alternatives. I'm sure that
Stokemonkey would be even less provocative, but that's a benefit for
the end user. From the standpoint of Clever Cycles' exposure to
product liability, they have to make a product that's fully compliant
with legal standards or risk big trouble and/or the inability to buy
big trouble insurance.

If you want a Stokemonkey soon, you'd probably be better off rolling
your own. Todd Fahrner is my friend, and I believe he'll eventually
get around to bringing an excellent new version of Stokemonkey to
market. But at the moment, he has his hands full with a beautiful and
thriving new shop selling all kinds of interesting city bikes, and I
suspect it will be a while before he's willing to discuss Stokemonkey
again, and a while longer after that before new units are shipping to
eager buyers.

Any rear hub motor that can operate in reverse can be adapted to
function in the same manner as Stokemonkey.

Chalo

[me@privacy.net]

JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> wrote:

>Bottom bracket motors will always be tricky to retrofit, but hub
>motors work well enough

For some reason I just like the idea of hub motors
better..... cleaner lines and all

[Dan Burkhart]

Ryan Cousineau Wrote:
> In article <Dan.Burkhart.38kutb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>,
> Dan Burkhart <Dan.Burkhart.38kutb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Ryan Cousineau Wrote:
> > > In article <656Rj.185$087.164@newsfe07.lga>,
> > > DougC <dcimper@norcom2000.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > > > > ...
> > > > > I saw a homebrew with a clever-looking mount: heavy-duty
> custom
> > > rack
> > > > > carrying an electric motor directly above the rear wheel.
> Chain
> > > drive
> > > > > from the motor down to the non-drive side of the hub, where
> there
> > > was a
> > > > > second freewheel for the motor drive.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe the rider was using a LHD BMX cog on the hub, and I
> > > assume
> > > > > (with no certainty) he was using some flavor of flip-flop hub.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Did it really have freewheels on BOTH sides? Or just sprockets
> on
> > > both
> > > > sides?... A number of kits use a chain drive on the left side,
> but
> > > the
> > > > sprocket on the wheel is just bolted on, literally through the
> > > spokes.
> > > > The engine drive side normally just spins all the time.
> > >
> > > I dug up my photos to review the evidence. It's definitely a LHD
> > > freewheel. Indeed, the drive side uses a multi-speed freewheel.
> > >
> > > <http://www.flickr.com/photos/rcousine/2448067142/>
> > >
> > > > There are people who use a disk brake hub, and bolt a sprocket
> to
> > > the
> > > > disk mount. Also at least one company has made a double-drive
> hub,
> > > with
> > > > the normal freewheel on the right and a bolted-on "stationary"
> > > sprocket
> > > > on the left (Staton kits have these).
> > > >
> > > > Motorized-bike people have been wishing for a double-freewheel
> hub
> > > for a
> > > > /long/ time, and I'd not heard of any in production. There are
> > > flip-flop
> > > > BMX hubs that can take freewheels on both sides but I was
> informed
> > > > (here, quite possibly) that the threading is the same direction
> on
> > > both
> > > > sides--so the left side can't be used for driving, unless it's
> > > flipped
> > > > over to the right.
> > >
> > > Motorized bike people need to pay more attention to obscure BMX
> parts,
> > > where the Left-Hand Drive exists:
> > >
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/3kntpc
> > > 54>
> > >
> > > The purpose of these off-side drives, aside from looking cool, is
> to
> > > let
> > > riders who prefer to do coping grinds on the right-hand side to do
> so
> > > unimpeded.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
> > > "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> > > "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
> >
> > I have a bike on my floor with a left side freewheel driven by a
> > Currie motor. and a 7 speed freewheel on the right.If you have seen
> the
> > Schwinn e-bike that Canadian Tire sells, it is exactly the same
> machine
> > with the Mongoose brand on it. I think the reason I have been unable
> to
> > sell it is the fact that it is such a piece of crap I cannot bring
> > myself to talk it up.
> > I've offered it cheap just to get rid of it, but it's still here.
> > Dan Burkhart
> > www.boomerbicycle.ca
>
> Either you like the rest of your floor stock better, or I'd like a
> copy
> of your closeout catalog! :).
>
> For those curious, here's the Canadian Tire Schwinn:
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/3rdsho
> =845524443296291&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=1408474396672077&bmUID=12094308186
> 69>
>
> It is rather Goldbergian.
>
> Does the LHD motor connect to a freewheel on the hub, or does it
> drag/regenerate (fixed cog) when not powering the bike? Any
> interesting
> details about the parts? I assume the hub is some rather
> underspecified
> flip/flop freewheel hub, possibly using a part originally made for a
> tandem with a thread-on drum brake.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
> "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

It is a freewheel, not fixed, with left hand thread. Screw on drum
brakes use a right hand thread.
The hub is dime store quality just like the rest of the bike.
http://i25.tinypic.com/2ug051w.jpg
I'm not sure what I was thinking when I let myself be talked into
buying this thing. Obscure components are never a plus.
In future, I'll leave it to the likes of Canadian Tire to foist this
crap on an un-suspecting public.
Dan Burkhart
www.boomerbicycle.ca


--
Dan Burkhart

[Chalo]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>
> I assume the hub is some rather underspecified
> flip/flop freewheel hub, possibly using a part originally made for a
> tandem with a thread-on drum brake.

Left-hand drive e-bikes like that use RH/LH threaded hubs, not RH/RH
threaded hubs as used on tandems and BMX racing bikes.

A few freestyle bikes came equipped with RH/LH threaded hubs, and it
is these few hubs that I have been able to retrofit to add left-side
electric assist to a pushbike. Currie and Mongoose manufactured their
own RH/LH hubs in 135mm width with 10mm axles. They are crappy hubs,
but much more of a drop-in solution for an e-bike than a 110mm hub
with a 14mm axle.

Staton Inc. made some special RH/LH hubs for custom builders, but
their axles feature the most inept design I have ever seen on any bike
part. They seem to be intended to inflict permanent damage to your
bike's dropouts before breaking off at one or both of the snap ring
grooves cut into them. Just comically horrible:

http://www.staton-inc.com/Details.asp?ProductID=2769

The hub shell seems to be very nicely made (befitting its high price)
and would be useful to a home machinist who could make his own axle
parts. It's nice that they saw fit to produce the hub shell in 28,
36, and 48 hole drillings. Shame about that axle, though. It would
be difficult to come up with a worse bike part if you tried.

Chalo

[me@privacy.net]

mark@drumbent.com wrote:

>After pedaling my cargo trike for two years and occasionally just
>about popping my heart out of my chest on hills I added a Wilderness
>Energy kit:

How you like the Wilderness kit so far?

I've been thinking abt taking an old Ross mt bike I
have and using such a kit on it

[Brian Huntley]

On Apr 29, 12:50 am, Ron Ruff <rruffrr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> There are a lot of good ways to integrate electric power into light
> vehicles for getting around town. The problem is that our system still
> promotes the "bigger and more expensive is better (and safer)"
> paradigm. If we could start making the streets safe and easy for bikes
> and light vehicles, instead of designing everything for 6,000 lb SUVs,
> this would be a no-brainer.

The recent rise and some-what legal status of electric scooters in
Toronto has lead to a lot of complaints about them using the bike
lanes. There's just nowhere to put them without ticking off somebody.

[A Muzi]

Ron Ruff wrote:
> There are a lot of good ways to integrate electric power into light
> vehicles for getting around town. The problem is that our system still
> promotes the "bigger and more expensive is better (and safer)"
> paradigm. If we could start making the streets safe and easy for bikes
> and light vehicles, instead of designing everything for 6,000 lb SUVs,
> this would be a no-brainer.

I use a system that fuels on sesame bagels and espresso, converts to
energy though a system known as 'meat'. Climbs OK, not like it used to
though.

Seriously what about a bicycle needs 'improvement'?
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[mark@drumbent.com]

On Apr 29, 10:58 am, m...@privacy.net wrote:
> m...@drumbent.com wrote:
> >After pedaling my cargo trike for two years and occasionally just
> >about popping my heart out of my chest on hills I added a Wilderness
> >Energy kit:
>
> How you like the Wilderness kit so far?
>
> I've been thinking abt taking an old Ross mt bike I
> have and using such a kit on it


I like it, but have had a few issues with it not working or stuttering
in the rain. We've never quite figured out where the water gets in,
or even if it's just condensation. Is it the controller box? The
handlebar-mounted throttle? One of the many connection points between
these bits and the motor or battery pack?

So one thing we've just done is swap out the stock connectors for ones
by Anderson, which latch together more positively. And to the backs
of each connector I'm going to dab in some RTV sealant, and that
should take care of any water getting in via the connections.

The motor seems tough, and I park the trike each winter outside
(though under dry cover) and even after some cold nights of -30C the
motor runs just fine the following Spring.

If you have the cash (and love hi-tech gadgets) the BionX is very
cool. It is not the right system for my trike's needs, but if I was
building up a 2-wheel e-bike I'd try to figure out how to afford one.

Mark

[Ron Ruff]

On Apr 29, 10:30*am, Brian Huntley <brian_hunt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The recent rise and some-what legal status of electric scooters in
> Toronto has lead to a lot of complaints about them using the bike
> lanes. There's just nowhere to put them without ticking off somebody.

You may think it a bit extreme, but I'd be in favor of an entire auto
lane reserved for bicycles and very light vehicles... plenty of room,
then. If there is only one lane, then the cars can take a different
route.

[Ecnerwal]

In article
<10fd76b2-81ee-40dd-bd59-65f0ee6282dd@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:

> My impression is that Stokemonkey production has been forestalled
> pending some plausible way to make it meet the legal definition of an
> electric assist bike (which in most of the USA means that is would
> have to be incapable of traveling faster than 20mph on motor power
> alone).

All it takes is an intelligent controller, which should be a trivial
microprocessor project. For any of the brushless versions, it would be a
very simple task to design it right into the controller that a brushless
motor needs to run properly anyway. If speed <= 19.99 mph, apply power
to motor if asked to. If speed >20 mph, don't. Done.

Likewise, none (or nearly none - I think perhaps the expensive Canadian
model with the regen braking did) of the offerings available a year or
two ago when I looked into the hub motors bothered with this simple
controller approach to meeting the legal limits - there did seem to be a
lot of "just put on the motor that can go 35MPH and don't worry about
it, though *of course* we only sell those for *offroad* applications,
nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

The sad part being that up to 1KW is permitted, along with the 20mph -
and the only way to stay within 20 mph with a 1KW motor on the flat
requires active control. But when pointing your overweight electric
assist bike (or cargo-hauling trike, the sort of thing I was actually
thinking of applying this to, for cutting down on car use short-haul)
uphill, up to 1 KW (with a 20 mph limited controller) might be very
welcome indeed.

--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by

[Jenny Brien]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:29:58 +0100, Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:

> JennyB wrote:
>>
>> >http://cleverchimp.com/products/stokemonkey/
>>
>> The retro-fit market is still rapidly developing and plagued with
>> supply problems. Cleverchimp have not been taking any more orders for
>> the last six months. I am very impressed with the concept, and will be
>> getting an Xtracycle with a view no either ordering one when they
>> become available again, or else building the equivalent.
>
> My impression is that Stokemonkey production has been forestalled
> pending some plausible way to make it meet the legal definition of an
> electric assist bike (which in most of the USA means that is would
> have to be incapable of traveling faster than 20mph on motor power
> alone). It arguably already does this because the motor can only
> apply power when the pedals are in motion. But all you have to do to
> demonstrate that it is a non-compliant bike is remove feet from pedals
> while motoring at over 20mph.
>
IMHO, the responsibility should be on the rider rather than the
manufacturer. After all, most cars can easily exceed the speed limit. A
restriction of 20 mph on ebike *use* seems sensible. While I would love
one that could chase down Vespas, any machine that does that regularly
ought to be treated as a moped.

> If you want a Stokemonkey soon, you'd probably be better off rolling
> your own. Todd Fahrner is my friend, and I believe he'll eventually
> get around to bringing an excellent new version of Stokemonkey to
> market. But at the moment, he has his hands full with a beautiful and
> thriving new shop selling all kinds of interesting city bikes, and I
> suspect it will be a while before he's willing to discuss Stokemonkey
> again, and a while longer after that before new units are shipping to
> eager buyers.
>
That's what I expected. Well, I'd better get an Xtracycle first, and see
how things go!

> Any rear hub motor that can operate in reverse can be adapted to
> function in the same manner as Stokemonkey.
>
A direct-drive hub is quiet and simple, but very heavy for its power.
Would it be good to use a smaller, high-revving motor and gear it down?
I'm thinking of a primary chain from the pedals to a powered jackshaft
running about 200 rpm.

Ebikes seem to require fewer gears. Would an Alfine hub be a good match
for this application? What would be the effect on efficiency and
reliability of running it inboard too, at higher revs and lower torque?

[Brian Huntley]

On Apr 29, 12:31 pm, Ron Ruff <rruffrr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 29, 10:30 am, Brian Huntley <brian_hunt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The recent rise and some-what legal status of electric scooters in
> > Toronto has lead to a lot of complaints about them using the bike
> > lanes. There's just nowhere to put them without ticking off somebody.
>
> You may think it a bit extreme, but I'd be in favor of an entire auto
> lane reserved for bicycles and very light vehicles... plenty of room,
> then. If there is only one lane, then the cars can take a different
> route.

Not so extreme. But we'd have to share it with TTC buses, in the real
world. And probably taxis. And, defactor, anyone thinking about
turning or parking in the next three blocks. And they wouldn't plow it
in the winter or sweep it in the summer.

[Michael Press]

In article
<d02a18a9-a4c1-44c1-a27d-47d6d96fbde4@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Ron Ruff <rruffrruff@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Apr 29, 10:30*am, Brian Huntley <brian_hunt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The recent rise and some-what legal status of electric scooters in
> > Toronto has lead to a lot of complaints about them using the bike
> > lanes. There's just nowhere to put them without ticking off somebody.
>
> You may think it a bit extreme, but I'd be in favor of an entire auto
> lane reserved for bicycles and very light vehicles... plenty of room,
> then. If there is only one lane, then the cars can take a different
> route.

Cannot work any better than bicycle lanes because
motorized traffic must turn left, turn right,
enter and exit parking lots, and, yes, delivery
vans must double park.

This is not difficult. Practice riding skills,
keep your head on a swivel, and you mind on
the job. Signal your intentions to those around
you, direct traffic when you can be of use.
Riding in traffic is good when you have the
skills and are confident.

At red lights I clear the right lane
for those who want to turn right on red.
I look behind me and acknowledge those
whom I may be in front of. Just before
green I clear the way and continue riding
the right side of the right lane.

--
Michael Press

[Chalo]

Ecnerwal wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
> >
> > My impression is that Stokemonkey production has been forestalled
> > pending some plausible way to make it meet the legal definition of an
> > electric assist bike (which in most of the USA means that is would
> > have to be incapable of traveling faster than 20mph on motor power
> > alone).
>
> All it takes is an intelligent controller, which should be a trivial
> microprocessor project. For any of the brushless versions, it would be a
> very simple task to design it right into the controller that a brushless
> motor needs to run properly anyway. If speed <= 19.99 mph, apply power
> to motor if asked to. If speed >20 mph, don't. Done.

RIght. But Stokemonkey is a retrofit kit that has no way of knowing
what gearing ratios or what wheel size it is mechanically connected
to. The installation instructions could include a stipulation that
those values must be entered into the controller, but that's leaving a
lot to chance and the installer's competence.

Chalo

[Chalo]

Ecnerwal wrote:
>
> The sad part being that up to 1KW is permitted, along with the 20mph -
> and the only way to stay within 20 mph with a 1KW motor on the flat
> requires active control.

The real problem with legal e-bikes is that they are overconstrained.
I say limit them by output power, or by maximum speed, or by weight--
but choose just one of these things to use as a restriction, according
to whichever public concern is at issue.

Here in Texas, there is no power limit on e-bikes, but there is a
maximum speed limit (20mph) and a weight limit of 100 pounds. This
means that pedicabs and cargo trikes can't legally be fitted with e-
assist, even though that's one of the best and most appropriate uses
for e-assist.

Chalo

[Ecnerwal]

In article
<94432bc9-ac43-4f30-8138-df53e2d5b001@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:

> The real problem with legal e-bikes is that they are overconstrained.
> I say limit them by output power, or by maximum speed, or by weight--
> but choose just one of these things to use as a restriction, according
> to whichever public concern is at issue.

The other real problem is that they remain subject to a dizzying web of
conflicting state laws, such that you could be going along quite
legally, cross a state line, and be illegal. Which makes producing the
things for sale a dicey proposition, at best, and not worth bothering
with, mostly.

Some states did clean up excessively restrictive state laws after the
federal definition (which actually appears to be 750 watts, though some
states do permit 1000 watts) went through in 2003 - others did not, and
appear unlikely to do so.

--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by

[Brian Huntley]

On Apr 29, 2:55 pm, Ecnerwal <LawrenceSM...@SOuthernVERmont.NyET>
wrote:
>
> The other real problem is that they remain subject to a dizzying web of
> conflicting state laws, such that you could be going along quite
> legally, cross a state line, and be illegal. Which makes producing the
> things for sale a dicey proposition, at best, and not worth bothering
> with, mostly.
>
> Some states did clean up excessively restrictive state laws after the
> federal definition (which actually appears to be 750 watts, though some
> states do permit 1000 watts) went through in 2003 - others did not, and
> appear unlikely to do so.

In Ontario, and by Federal Canadian law, a "power-assisted bicycle"
means a vehicle that:

(a) has steering handlebars and is equipped with pedals,

(b) is designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact
with the ground,

(c) is capable of being propelled by muscular power,

(d) has one or more electric motors that have, singly or in
combination, the following characteristics:

(i) it has a total continuous power output rating, measured at
the shaft of each motor, of 500 W or less,

(ii) if it is engaged by the use of muscular power, power
assistance immediately ceases when the muscular power ceases,

(iii) if it is engaged by the use of an accelerator
controller, power assistance immediately ceases when the brakes are
applied, and

(iv) it is incapable of providing further assistance when the
bicycle attains a speed of 32 km/h on level ground,


So there's no going over 500W here, it seems. I still can't seem to
find what's allowing those scooters on the streets other thank
lackadaisical policing. They don't have pedals, so (c) is violated.
Mopeds now need licenses, and the E-scoots I've seen don't have them,
so that's not it either.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <91344$481796e9$31441@news.teranews.com>,
A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

> Ron Ruff wrote:
> > There are a lot of good ways to integrate electric power into light
> > vehicles for getting around town. The problem is that our system still
> > promotes the "bigger and more expensive is better (and safer)"
> > paradigm. If we could start making the streets safe and easy for bikes
> > and light vehicles, instead of designing everything for 6,000 lb SUVs,
> > this would be a no-brainer.
>
> I use a system that fuels on sesame bagels and espresso, converts to
> energy though a system known as 'meat'. Climbs OK, not like it used to
> though.
>
> Seriously what about a bicycle needs 'improvement'?

Well, for healthy and reasonably fit people, bikes are awesome.

Then there's my co-worker Tom. He's active in the local cycling-activist
scene, and likes to ride his bike on what I assume is about a 1-hour
commute to work (each way, if I'm guessing right).

He's had more than serious heart issue, and he's near retirement. For
him, an electric-assist bicycle makes the difference between riding to
work, and indeed, riding any distance at any speed, or not.

Not everywhere is Amsterdam, and not everyone is fit. In Vancouver, an
electric-assist bike could make some otherwise-daunting hills a breeze.
It also means you can ride farther or faster without changing into
special clothes or stinking up your non-special clothes.

electric bikes aren't for everyone (I own zero), but I think they're a
sensible idea.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[Ron Ruff]

On Apr 29, 3:45*pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> Seriously what about a bicycle needs 'improvement'?

The ability to travel in cold, sleet, hail, snow, rain, and excessive
heat... in reasonable comfort. For general city transportation, an
enclosed (or convertable) light electric vehicle could replace most
cars, buses, and taxis. Much more efficient, safer, takes up less
space driving and parking etc. I'm thinking of it as a compliment to
bikes for people who don't want to ride a bike, not a replacement.

[clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:39:57 -0700 (PDT), Brian Huntley
<brian_huntley@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 29, 2:55 pm, Ecnerwal <LawrenceSM...@SOuthernVERmont.NyET>
>wrote:
>>
>> The other real problem is that they remain subject to a dizzying web of
>> conflicting state laws, such that you could be going along quite
>> legally, cross a state line, and be illegal. Which makes producing the
>> things for sale a dicey proposition, at best, and not worth bothering
>> with, mostly.
>>
>> Some states did clean up excessively restrictive state laws after the
>> federal definition (which actually appears to be 750 watts, though some
>> states do permit 1000 watts) went through in 2003 - others did not, and
>> appear unlikely to do so.
>
>In Ontario, and by Federal Canadian law, a "power-assisted bicycle"
>means a vehicle that:
>
> (a) has steering handlebars and is equipped with pedals,
>
> (b) is designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact
>with the ground,
>
> (c) is capable of being propelled by muscular power,
>
> (d) has one or more electric motors that have, singly or in
>combination, the following characteristics:
>
> (i) it has a total continuous power output rating, measured at
>the shaft of each motor, of 500 W or less,
>
> (ii) if it is engaged by the use of muscular power, power
>assistance immediately ceases when the muscular power ceases,
>
> (iii) if it is engaged by the use of an accelerator
>controller, power assistance immediately ceases when the brakes are
>applied, and
>
> (iv) it is incapable of providing further assistance when the
>bicycle attains a speed of 32 km/h on level ground,
>
>
>So there's no going over 500W here, it seems. I still can't seem to
>find what's allowing those scooters on the streets other thank
>lackadaisical policing. They don't have pedals, so (c) is violated.
>Mopeds now need licenses, and the E-scoots I've seen don't have them,
>so that's not it either.


Some of the "e-scoots" I've seen in ontario DO have pedals, but you
would never pedal it more than a couple hundred feet, on a good day.
They attach OUTSIDE the foot boards (like 1.5 feet apart) and are
obviously only there to appear to be legal.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:39:57 -0700 (PDT), Brian Huntley
<brian_huntley@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 29, 2:55 pm, Ecnerwal <LawrenceSM...@SOuthernVERmont.NyET>
>wrote:
>>
>> The other real problem is that they remain subject to a dizzying web of
>> conflicting state laws, such that you could be going along quite
>> legally, cross a state line, and be illegal. Which makes producing the
>> things for sale a dicey proposition, at best, and not worth bothering
>> with, mostly.
>>
>> Some states did clean up excessively restrictive state laws after the
>> federal definition (which actually appears to be 750 watts, though some
>> states do permit 1000 watts) went through in 2003 - others did not, and
>> appear unlikely to do so.
>
>In Ontario, and by Federal Canadian law, a "power-assisted bicycle"
>means a vehicle that:
>
> (a) has steering handlebars and is equipped with pedals,
>
> (b) is designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact
>with the ground,
>
> (c) is capable of being propelled by muscular power,
>
> (d) has one or more electric motors that have, singly or in
>combination, the following characteristics:
>
> (i) it has a total continuous power output rating, measured at
>the shaft of each motor, of 500 W or less,
>
> (ii) if it is engaged by the use of muscular power, power
>assistance immediately ceases when the muscular power ceases,
>
> (iii) if it is engaged by the use of an accelerator
>controller, power assistance immediately ceases when the brakes are
>applied, and
>
> (iv) it is incapable of providing further assistance when the
>bicycle attains a speed of 32 km/h on level ground,
>
>
>So there's no going over 500W here, it seems. I still can't seem to
>find what's allowing those scooters on the streets other thank
>lackadaisical policing. They don't have pedals, so (c) is violated.
>Mopeds now need licenses, and the E-scoots I've seen don't have them,
>so that's not it either.


As far as the 500 watts is concerned - how are they going to know the
difference if the motor says 500 watts and is limited to 32kph?

With a series wound motor (I know, they virtually all use PMs) a 500
watt nominal will pull well over a Kw if forced.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[A Muzi]

>> Brian Huntley <brian_hunt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> The recent rise and some-what legal status of electric scooters in
>>> Toronto has lead to a lot of complaints about them using the bike
>>> lanes. There's just nowhere to put them without ticking off somebody.

> Ron Ruff <rruffrr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> You may think it a bit extreme, but I'd be in favor of an entire auto
>> lane reserved for bicycles and very light vehicles... plenty of room,
>> then. If there is only one lane, then the cars can take a different
>> route.

Brian Huntley wrote:
> Not so extreme. But we'd have to share it with TTC buses, in the real
> world. And probably taxis. And, defactor, anyone thinking about
> turning or parking in the next three blocks. And they wouldn't plow it
> in the winter or sweep it in the summer.

That describes the streets I use now! You left out the
phone-drink-mapquest-music big truck zombies drifting across my lane.

What's 'defactor'?
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[Tom Sherman]

Andrew Muzi, back from Google Groups purgatory, wrote:
>>> Brian Huntley <brian_hunt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The recent rise and some-what legal status of electric scooters in
>>>> Toronto has lead to a lot of complaints about them using the bike
>>>> lanes. There's just nowhere to put them without ticking off somebody.
>
>> Ron Ruff <rruffrr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> You may think it a bit extreme, but I'd be in favor of an entire auto
>>> lane reserved for bicycles and very light vehicles... plenty of room,
>>> then. If there is only one lane, then the cars can take a different
>>> route.
>
> Brian Huntley wrote:
>> Not so extreme. But we'd have to share it with TTC buses, in the real
>> world. And probably taxis. And, defactor, anyone thinking about
>> turning or parking in the next three blocks. And they wouldn't plow it
>> in the winter or sweep it in the summer.
>
> That describes the streets I use now!

I remember things being better during the Soglin regime.

> You left out the
> phone-drink-mapquest-music big truck zombies drifting across my lane.
>
At least you do not have multitudes of cretinous commercial school bus
drivers that change lanes without using their mirrors - the best
argument yet against busing of school children.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:09:07 -0500, A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org>
wrote:

>Brian Huntley wrote:
>> Not so extreme. But we'd have to share it with TTC buses, in the real
>> world. And probably taxis. And, defactor, anyone thinking about
>> turning or parking in the next three blocks. And they wouldn't plow it
>> in the winter or sweep it in the summer.
>
>That describes the streets I use now! You left out the
>phone-drink-mapquest-music big truck zombies drifting across my lane.
>
>What's 'defactor'?

Dear Andrew,

Possibly "de facto" with some spacing and fat-finger flourishes?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[Brian Huntley]

On Apr 29, 8:36 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:09:07 -0500, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org>
> wrote:
> >What's 'defactor'?
>
> Dear Andrew,
>
> Possibly "de facto" with some spacing and fat-finger flourishes?

Quite correct, Carl, and thank you.

[Dan Burkhart]

mark@drumbent.com Wrote:
> On Apr 29, 10:58 am, m...@privacy.net wrote:
> > m...@drumbent.com wrote:
> > >After pedaling my cargo trike for two years and occasionally just
> > >about popping my heart out of my chest on hills I added a
> Wilderness
> > >Energy kit:
> >
> > How you like the Wilderness kit so far?
> >
> > I've been thinking abt taking an old Ross mt bike I
> > have and using such a kit on it
>
>
> I like it, but have had a few issues with it not working or stuttering
> in the rain. We've never quite figured out where the water gets in,
> or even if it's just condensation. Is it the controller box? The
> handlebar-mounted throttle? One of the many connection points between
> these bits and the motor or battery pack?
>
> So one thing we've just done is swap out the stock connectors for ones
> by Anderson, which latch together more positively. And to the backs
> of each connector I'm going to dab in some RTV sealant, and that
> should take care of any water getting in via the connections.
>
> The motor seems tough, and I park the trike each winter outside
> (though under dry cover) and even after some cold nights of -30C the
> motor runs just fine the following Spring.
>
> If you have the cash (and love hi-tech gadgets) the BionX is very
> cool. It is not the right system for my trike's needs, but if I was
> building up a 2-wheel e-bike I'd try to figure out how to afford one.
>
> Mark

The only problem we ever had with the Wilderness energy kit came after
it was exposed to the rain, and water got into the controller. I
dissassembled it and gave the circuit board a good dose of WD 40.
Fixed.
Dan Burkhart
www.boomerbicycle.ca


--
Dan Burkhart

[me@privacy.net]

mark@drumbent.com wrote:

>If you have the cash (and love hi-tech gadgets) the BionX is very
>cool. It is not the right system for my trike's needs, but if I was
>building up a 2-wheel e-bike I'd try to figure out how to afford one.

Thanks I will look up the BionX system

I really find the idea of an e-bike very intriguing!

[Chalo]

Jenny Brien wrote:
>
> A direct-drive hub is quiet and simple, but very heavy for its power.
> Would it be good to use a smaller, high-revving motor and gear it down?

Gear reduction imposes wear, noise, efficiency losses, and points of
failure. If you can live with the implications, you can
(potentially) save some weight by using a gearmotor or reduction
gearbox. It's likely to be lighter and more efficient if you use
chain or toothed-belt reduction, but the physical size of the
components and packaging can exceed available space, and often that
means more maintenance, grime, and things that must be shrouded for
safety.

There are hub motors with gears and freewheeling clutches, but
obviously none of them would be suitable for running in reverse to
power a left-side crank.

All of the following geared hub motors are highly regarded:

http://ebikes.ca/ezee/
http://www.thesuperkids.com/500wabmcelbi.html
http://estelle.de/e/motoren.asp

> I'm thinking of a primary chain from the pedals to a powered jackshaft
> running about 200 rpm.

Small, non-hub bike and scooter motors will typically deliver their
rated power and efficiency at close to 3000rpm. For radio-control
vehicle motors in the same power range, the typical speed would be at
least 10,000rpm. Reducing these speeds to 200rpm at the output side
of a jackshaft is not trivial, and it implies either a gearbox at the
motor shaft or a very large input sprocket at the jackshaft.

Some Chinese brushed scooter motors use built-in gear reductions,
which could greatly simplify installation:

http://tncscooters.com/product.php?sku=106124
http://tncscooters.com/product.php?sku=106155

> Ebikes seem to require fewer gears. Would an Alfine hub be a good match
> for this application?

An Alfine or Nexus hub would be OK for a modestly-powered e-bike and a
normal sized or smaller rider. It would be prudent to raise the
primary gearing to minimize the torque applied to the gearbox. This
would make sense anyway, if one objective of the power assist is to
raise the top speed of the bike.

> What would be the effect on efficiency and
> reliability of running it inboard too, at higher revs and lower torque?

That would be easier on the hub mechanism, but it would be a bad idea
for a crank assist. Crank assist should be set up to power the cranks
at a speed that feels normal to the rider. Electric traction motors
usually deliver their highest power at about 50% of their free speed,
and their highest efficiency at about 80% of their free speed. So if
you feel best pedaling at 90rpm, then 90 crank rpm should correspond
to 80% of the motor's free speed. Variable gearing at the jackshaft
interferes with that relationship, and at worst could drive the cranks
at an untenably high speed with high power and cause you to beat up
your legs when you lose the pedals.

One of the elegant characteristics of crank assist is that, properly
implemented, shifting for the rider's comfort and performance will
tend to keep the motor in its most efficient speed range. And then
there need only be one set of changeable gears.

Using an Alfine hub fitted with a sprotor as a separate wheel drive
would be workable, but then there would be two separate shifting
mechanisms with different operating strategies. Not bad as a mental
exercise, but probably bad for efficiency and/or performance in the
long run.

Chalo

[mark@drumbent.com]

On Apr 30, 10:16 am, Dan Burkhart <Dan.Burkhart.38o...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> m...@drumbent.com Wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 29, 10:58 am, m...@privacy.net wrote:
> > > m...@drumbent.com wrote:
> > > >After pedaling my cargo trike for two years and occasionally just
> > > >about popping my heart out of my chest on hills I added a
> > Wilderness
> > > >Energy kit:
>
> > > How you like the Wilderness kit so far?
>
> > > I've been thinking abt taking an old Ross mt bike I
> > > have and using such a kit on it
>
> > I like it, but have had a few issues with it not working or stuttering
> > in the rain. We've never quite figured out where the water gets in,
> > or even if it's just condensation. Is it the controller box? The
> > handlebar-mounted throttle? One of the many connection points between
> > these bits and the motor or battery pack?
>
> > So one thing we've just done is swap out the stock connectors for ones
> > by Anderson, which latch together more positively. And to the backs
> > of each connector I'm going to dab in some RTV sealant, and that
> > should take care of any water getting in via the connections.
>
> > The motor seems tough, and I park the trike each winter outside
> > (though under dry cover) and even after some cold nights of -30C the
> > motor runs just fine the following Spring.
>
> > If you have the cash (and love hi-tech gadgets) the BionX is very
> > cool. It is not the right system for my trike's needs, but if I was
> > building up a 2-wheel e-bike I'd try to figure out how to afford one.
>
> > Mark
>
> The only problem we ever had with the Wilderness energy kit came after
> it was exposed to the rain, and water got into the controller. I
> dissassembled it and gave the circuit board a good dose of WD 40.
> Fixed.
> Dan Burkhartwww.boomerbicycle.ca
>
> --
> Dan Burkhart


Yes, that's a good tip. Over the years I've told people that WD40
does not belong anywhere near a bike, because there are other products
that are much better for the various uses to which WD is put. But e-
bikes change that. You can actually use WD40 for its original intent
- water displacement in electrical systems.

Mark

[me@privacy.net]

Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:

>All of the following geared hub motors are highly regarded:
>
>http://ebikes.ca/ezee/
>http://www.thesuperkids.com/500wabmcelbi.html
>http://estelle.de/e/motoren.asp

Could you fit these motors above on the REAR wheel
instead of front wheel?

[Jenny Brien]

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:20:38 +0100, Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jenny Brien wrote:
>>
>> A direct-drive hub is quiet and simple, but very heavy for its power.
>> Would it be good to use a smaller, high-revving motor and gear it down?
>
> Gear reduction imposes wear, noise, efficiency losses, and points of
> failure. If you can live with the implications, you can
> (potentially) save some weight by using a gearmotor or reduction
> gearbox. It's likely to be lighter and more efficient if you use
> chain or toothed-belt reduction, but the physical size of the
> components and packaging can exceed available space, and often that
> means more maintenance, grime, and things that must be shrouded for
> safety.
>
Is the rated rpm of a motor its no-load speed? Then whatever motor I use,
it's got to have a final output at no more than 400 (max efficiency at 80
cadence, geared 48x12). Maybe nothing will do that better than a hub
motor.

> There are hub motors with gears and freewheeling clutches, but
> obviously none of them would be suitable for running in reverse to
> power a left-side crank.

It took a long time to work out why the Stokemonkey did things that way!
The obvious solution with a geared hub motor would be to mount it so that
it spins on its axle and bolt a sprocket on the side.


> An Alfine or Nexus hub would be OK for a modestly-powered e-bike and a
> normal sized or smaller rider. It would be prudent to raise the
> primary gearing to minimize the torque applied to the gearbox. This
> would make sense anyway, if one objective of the power assist is to
> raise the top speed of the bike.
>
No, I'm more interested in range and load-carrying, but it makes me think
that if I were building a longtail ebike, it would probably have fat 20"
wheels and a crank-forward position. That would allow a small load area
above the front wheel and behind a fairing, and with similar carrying
capacity to a SUB would not be much longer overall than a touring bike.

[Ron Ruff]

> Cannot work any better than bicycle lanes because
> motorized traffic must turn left, turn right,
> enter and exit parking lots, and, yes, delivery
> vans must double park.

Well, of course that right-most lane would be at least 2 lanes for
smalller vehicles, and delivery vans can can GTF off the road when
they park... etc...

Yes, right turning cars and and such may enter... but the point is to
design the road system to make bikes and light vehicles the primary
means of transportation of humans. If it is slightly inconvenient for
SUVs... then they can cope... hopefully with some irritation... so
that we do not reward sociopathic (bigger is better) behavior.

[Chalo]

m...@privacy.net wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
>
> >All of the following geared hub motors are highly regarded:
>
> >http://ebikes.ca/ezee/
> >http://www.thesuperkids.com/500wabmcelbi.html
> >http://estelle.de/e/motoren.asp
>
> Could you fit these motors above on the REAR wheel
> instead of front wheel?

The first one (the eZee hub motor) is only offered as a front version
by ebikes.ca, but the BMC motor and the Heinzmann motor come in both
front and rear versions.

I built up an e-bike with a Heinzmann rear hub motor for a friend back
in 2000. It was a completely satisfactory piece of equipment to work
with. Its built-in torque arm makes it more trouble-free than some of
its more up-to-date counterparts. It is more expensive than most
others hub motors, like for like.

Chalo