Electric Bikes - DIY plans for a motor in the crank area conversion

I have seen a couple of ebikes - commercially made - that put the motor in the same area with the crank. Has anyone seen any diy plans to use this approach to convert a pedal bike?

Do you mean a motor in or stuck perpendicular to the bottom bracket between the cranks or one that is right next to the cranks driving the chain?

Hmmm that is a good question. I have read some articles on motorcycle design and one of the principles I read was that weight should be kept as low as possible and preferably evenly balanced between the wheels, with some adjustments based on handling requirements. I was thinking if the motor could be placed in the crank AREA it would meet both of these requirements and even be lower than the hub motor. that is the reason for my question. To answer your question - that is what my question was :) Which one, if any, of your two options is feasible? Which one would be the easiest to pull off? Are there more than these two options?

There is the cyclone kit which mounts under and behind the bottom bracket although if you do it their way you have to replace the cranks with a single gear freewheel crank.
I have seen another kit (not sure if it made it to sale though) that has the motor in front of the cranks and looks like it attaches to a IFS crank so you still have your 2-3 gears up front and it drives another gear a little outboard of that.

The one that goes perpendicular into the Bottom bracket uses some planetary gears I think I'm not sure if it was a kit or just a finished bike. Those are the ones I have seen I'm sure there could be more.

Are you planning on racing the bike? I mean at normal bicycle speeds as long as you don't have a 10lb+ motor + batteries on a rear rack there shouldn't be any problem for regular bicycle use. Even thsoe with high mounted stuff are only an issue when getting on/off a bicycle. Motorcycles are a little different since many of weigh 10times what a bicycle weighs and more often then not weigh more then the rider so weight probably matters a bit more.

These guys are between versions at the moment but their new system sounds awesome.
http://www.elationebikes.com.au/category1_1.htm
This one shows lots of pretty pictures and sells the required bits to diy.
http://www.users.bigpond.com/solarbbq/cheapdiybike.htm

Sample
http://mywebsite.bigpond.com/islandearth/nci/robleviston2small.jpg

Way cool! Thanks for the link! No, I don't plan to do any racing but I tend to carry a lot of weight on a bike. With my present ebike the 35 pound battery sits on the front tube. I have found that control is actually easier if someone is sitting on the back which tells me that there is a serious balance problem.

BB drive is the only way to go for IMO for steep loaded hills because you still get the higher speeds on the flats as wel as crawl up anything with the right gearing.
Cg. wise my experience says the lower you can put all the weight the better and preferably not at the ends.
The above also makes handling the bike when off it easier, but the bike improves when riding as well at low and high speeds.
Been there done that with the higher mounted batteries etc. never again.

I'm using a bionx right now, but, of course, I still want something lighter and faster.

The hub motors limit you on the flats and downhills. The electromagnetic resisitance effects are stronger at the higher speeds. I've tried hand cranking a bionx wheel vs a regular wheel which the bike elevated and I had a hard time making the bionx wheel go faster than 25mph.

Because the bionx wheel is in the back, you can feel the imbalance between the front and rear (esp when I even had the batter on the rear rack once).

I believe a BB drive will allow you to go faster on the flats at the same power output. And for the downhills, not only will you go faster because of the absence of any electromagnetic resistance (there was a name for this but I can't remember it now), but you will really get the benefit of coasting down with a heavier bicycle.

So I'm just waiting for someone to build the perfect BB drive system. The stuff at elationebikes look great. If they have a nice controller like Bionx, I might consider it for my next e-bike.

So I'm just waiting for someone to build the perfect BB drive system.

Panasonic has been building one for several years. Smooth, lightweight - couple to whatever rear gears you wish. Sadly, nobody is offering any here in USA anymore.

GreenSpeed are also playing with a version with pedal torque control but at the moment it is not finalized and the brochure in their number 10 newsletter shows a single ring.

What is BB drive?

BB is bottom bracket, a few types shown here:
http://www.parktool.com/repair/byregion.asp?catid=61&imageField2.x=4&imageField2.y=13

BB drive transmits the motor's power through this, so as to use the bike's gears.

Panasonic has been building one for several years. Smooth, lightweight - couple to whatever rear gears you wish. Sadly, nobody is offering any here in USA anymore.

Sounds interesting. Do you have a link or a picture? thanks.

Here's a link to the Japanese site - http://www.panabyc.co.jp/

There used to be a link to OEM description of the drive unit which Giant Lite used for a couple years. One of our regulars rides one of those with an XtraCycle frame mod.

I regularly ride a Japanese market Panasonic with this unit and while it's not gonna impress the "motorcycle" crowd - assist only - it's smooth, quiet, lightweight, efficient and very dependable.

I think the downfall for it here in the USA is the fact that it's pedal assist only. Most USA riders just wanna push/twist a throttle and head off down the road at 35mph. Trouble is, that's a big risk with frame, tires, wheels, brakes, etc. that were never designed to be used in that way.

Being an old guy, we're just looking for a way to extend our range ...we like pedaling...and a way to take those short trips (12 mi) without starting up ye olde fuel burner ...Thinking Green/Exercise...15mph would be plenty of speed for me...I just want a simple system that wouldn't break the bank ... We bought a 300Watt scooter motor with built in controller and thumb throttle ...just need a way to hook it up...??? In the crank area seems perfect , but we don't have a clue about those freewheeling pedals/bottom bracket... More info for Dummies , Please...!!!!

Somebody posted a picture of a mountain bike with a (probably) worm drive connecting the can motor to the BB. That may be what the earlier poster was thinking of. I like the lowering and centralizing of mass too and while it wouldn't be cheap, the ideal setup to my way of thinking would use the space just in front of the downtube for the battery pack. That would pretty much limit things to NiMh or LiPo. The motor location used by the Stokemonkey just behind the BB and driving the crank through a chainwheeel on the left side of the BB (just like a tandem does) is way cool. SM seems kind of pricey though, no Pedelec or Cruise Control and what a waste of a hub motor. Some re-engineering of the idea to use a can or pancake motor might save some weight. Still, the low end hub motor systems are pretty cheap, if the SM cost half of what it does I would say go for it as is and call it good. Even with the need to buy an Xtracycle frame ($200). It's really sad that we have to be scrounging around in forums like this for ideas but more than that, for fabrication possibilities. I have all the ideas but don't have the tool skills, paying for a one off project could cost more (much more) than a really nice used car or motorcycle. That's just wrong. There should be plenty of market for the kinds of things we talk about here.

H

The bike in my sig is a BB drive built by Yamaha.

http://www.tokyo-motorshow.com/show/2001/ENGLISH/PUBLIC/BOOTH/YMH/img/Racer-01.JPG

Tech stuff:

http://www.yamaha-motor.co.jp/global/news/1999/05/19/images/keirin-pas2.jpg

The two motors drive the crank.

Wait a minute. Does this mean I could finally have my e-Unicorn with the Elationbike BB kit?
Maybe I could start building something like this:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/aug06/la_classic06/IMG_0011.jpg

That by the way was the working prototype for the Yamaha Racer-01 in my sig.

http://www.yamaha-motor.co.jp/global/news/1999/05/19/images/keirin-pas2.jpg

That keirin pacer motorbike is indeed really swell, I love it's steampunk aura. But being built out of a track bike, bb drive seems kinda pointless except to make it look badass, cause being fixXxed there's no variable gearing to be had. Ha!

I would used a 7 to 9 speed casette back there for sure. But if I could somehow make it look like the blue bike or, if I have the money, the Black and orange one, I would not only have the BB drive bike I've always wanted but I would also have one sweet looking bike that even the pedal purists would lust over.

Kickass!

Well, I gotta say I prefer the looks of the red bike, the other variations seem kinda gaudy. Some kinda plastic shell thing and brakes on a track bike, wtf? In the ABC subforum there's a thread about steam powered bikes, I've described a variation of this one that would make it look damned good IMO.

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=358572


I'd think that a hubmotor in a disk wheel would make for a better pacer. For example it could be made to look something like Ioannas Tamouridis' Look:

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x25/coutujean/7409b9b7.jpg

Maybe not the best application for a BB drive.

Just to clear one thing up: I don't want a pacer. I want a streetable eBike that looks like the Racer-01. So a 7 to 9 gear casette in the back and all of the battery, controller and motor components hidden away in a sexy plastic shell that looks as radical as the Racer-01.

come spring i could build the shell for the bike from carbon fiber or fiber glass easley. would you build the shell on the frame or make wood forms and make the shell and bolt it on?

i can even make the form with Thick aluninum window screen and epoxy over it.



does anyone have a good supplier for the bb drive? close to canada?

The best suppliers I know of in Canada are heavily geared towards hub motors, they don't really carry bb drives. In fact, BionX and Crystalyte are pretty much the only ones you can walk into a store and buy personally from what i've seen. You probably wouldn't be facing too much shipping to bring one in from outside the country though.

Just a thought I wanted to throw out here about a bb drive unit: I have read people talking about how much harder it is to pedal without electric assist because you have the resistance from the motor. So, what if a person were to hook up some sort of freewheel system to the sprocket attached to the motor so that, when you are pedaling when the motor is off/out of juice, it doesn't actually spin the motor, making pedaling easier?

Just a thought.

Many BB systems use freewheeling cranks

come spring i could build the shell for the bike from carbon fiber or fiber glass easley. would you build the shell on the frame or make wood forms and make the shell and bolt it on?

i can even make the form with Thick aluninum window screen and epoxy over it.



does anyone have a good supplier for the bb drive? close to canada?

Why hello you. :D

I think the real Racer-01 is a cabron fiber chassis cause i really don't see how you can get the part with the seat to work.

It would be interesting to create a replica but I have no clue how to build bike frames. I'm pretty good with electronics though.

http://www.roadbikereview.com/Channels/RoadBikeReview/images/products/Product_102755.jpg
Look familiar, here's a review the type/brand is softride they used to be a popular triathlon bike. http://www.roadbikereview.com/cat/2002-bikes/2002-triathlon-bike/softride-inc/PRD_102755_4228crx.aspx.

http://www.roadbikereview.com/Channels/RoadBikeReview/images/products/Product_102755.jpg
Look familiar, here's a review the type/brand is softride they used to be a popular triathlon bike. http://www.roadbikereview.com/cat/2002-bikes/2002-triathlon-bike/softride-inc/PRD_102755_4228crx.aspx.Get the right drive system and the BS of looks or frame weight will not be so important for efficiency.

The look of that bike has nothing to do with BS *or* efficiency, its a result of a design based around passive suspension. Something thats been used on bikes for decades to provide a comfortable ride without needing restrictive, overweight maintenance hogs like suspension bikes, something which only becomes a necessity when you need improved wheel contact and is a waste up until that point. I guess as you deal in motors and not bikes though, that might not be as important to you.

Drivetrain efficiency on an e-bike doesn't rely on downward force and is instead applied directly at the wheel. For all purposes, suspension makes no difference in energy loss caused by flex and in this case you would be correct. For human powered applications though, passive suspension is more about dampening vibrations whereas suspension is about providing a pivot point once the load on the bicycle exceeds the preload on the shock.

However, this means that as soon as you want to sprint, stand, or climb, suspension loses energy big time, particularily rear shocks. This is the reason that rear suspension designs are always in flux while the DF has remained fairly stable over the years: the search for efficient full suspension geometry.

However, as you're always sporting words on how much lighter the bb drive is, i'll also remind you that there's more than an extra 10lbs of weight on your bike compared to some of these Softride models. You should also know that while the bb drive looks more efficient on paper, you're relying on the chain drive of a bicycle which sports an energy loss of its own - about 98% counting the best and finest parts in the world, and less once you're down to the average stuff (let alone a huffy) in the end, bb frame drives are better performers than hub motors, but they aren't much more efficient in energy use at all.

Mind you, the softride is an unorthodox rendition, it would end up being slightly less efficient than a solid diamond frame due to the increased flex, but a little bit of that might be regained by having very little aerodynamic profile between the rider's legs and behind the rider. Personally, i'll just take a steel frame with a mid wheelbase, some nice cork/gel tape, and a brooks saddle. Not as fast, but much less tacky and just as comfy. Plus, you can carry a rack, and 50lbs of junk.

If you want to talk about silly design, i'd ask why you're criticizing an unorthodox tri bike instead of questioning why you're claiming to build one of the world's finest systems and then slapping it onto a huffy, losing huge amounts of reliability, practicality, and efficiency?

Suspension is not only an issue of comfort and when the riders energy will not be the prime source of motive power suspension losses are not as significant as on a conventional suspended bicycle. Suspension is getting sophisticated to the point where it can 'lock out' at normal pedalling inputs yet activate to absorb road shock. Front suspension is neccessary because when riding on surfaces other than tracks or closed courses an undue amount of surface irregularity negatively affects handling. If the front wheel cannot stay in contact with the ground it cannot properly steer the bike! Front suspension was invented well before rear suspension for that reason alone.

Hub motors are not more efficient and will not ever be until someone invents a multi-speed hub motor. Until then BB systems that can use either the rear cassette or an internal gear hub will get the most out of whatever motor is used at the BB. Hub motors have their advantages in designs that will have a limited speed range but their use in a vehicle that will be expected to traverse an unpredictable variety of terrain at a wide range of speeds cannot be claimed to be 'efficient'.

Nevertheless, I agree, aesthetics is not BS.

H

Suspension is not only an issue of comfort and when the riders energy will not be the prime source of motive power suspension losses are not as significant as on a conventional suspended bicycle. Suspension is getting sophisticated to the point where it can 'lock out' at normal pedalling inputs yet activate to absorb road shock. Front suspension is neccessary because when riding on surfaces other than tracks or closed courses an undue amount of surface irregularity negatively affects handling. If the front wheel cannot stay in contact with the ground it cannot properly steer the bike! Front suspension was invented well before rear suspension for that reason alone.

Hub motors are not more efficient and will not ever be until someone invents a multi-speed hub motor. Until then BB systems that can use either the rear cassette or an internal gear hub will get the most out of whatever motor is used at the BB. Hub motors have their advantages in designs that will have a limited speed range but their use in a vehicle that will be expected to traverse an unpredictable variety of terrain at a wide range of speeds cannot be claimed to be 'efficient'.

Nevertheless, I agree, aesthetics is not BS.

H

Liese, you missed this part I think:

without needing restrictive, overweight maintenance hogs like suspension bikes, something which only becomes a necessity when you need improved wheel contact and is a waste up until that point.

I already know all about suspension dynamics, trust me. A tri bike doesn't need suspension. Neither does a touring bike, a commuter, most bikes don't. I know people who ride light XC without suspension. Suspension is a comfort up until the terrain is unreliable, and in the city passive suspension works just as well on roads and paths as shocks. The design on something like a Softbike isn't just aesthetics. I think you ride a 'bent right? Well, its the same way the LWB's tend to ride smooth. You probably already know this stuff already though.

Front suspension is much more practical for everyday use than rear. You retain more energy comparatively, and gain a larger traction advantage. For domestic applications it can easily be skipped and comfort can be retained, but its a case of user preference. In the city, my peugeot px-10 rides more comfortably than does my full suspension fuji 2 diamond. I won't be hopping any curbs on the peugeot though.

On rear suspension bicycles, there are a few typical solutions to the energy loss, none of which are cure-alls. Rebounds and isolated geometry are great solutions for allowing the rear shock to work during big hits, but they work against the benefit of the shock for the rider on terrain that causes vibrations like rocks or roots. Lockouts need to be manually actuated, which isn't so bad if you've got a bar mounted toggle, but these are all solutions to a problem that doesn't need to be had for the everyday rider. Rear shocks belong on bikes being used on aggressive terrain.

As for hub motors, I never said they were more efficient. But the belief some people have that they're wholly inefficient is silly. There's no drivetrain loss, and the rated efficiency on a hub motor is quite good. One mistake some users make is to purchase the wrong motor for the job, not choosing one for their particular locale and then needing considerably more amps to generate enough torque for their needs, reducing their range.

On the flipside, my 408 goes 66kms off a charge on my battery, the torque and speed outputs are perfect for the intended application. The larger difference between bb/hub comes from the fact that the bb motor is capable of adapting itself to a larger degree of terrain. There's much more of a difference in potential performance than there is overall efficiency.

Liese, you missed this part I think:

without needing restrictive, overweight maintenance hogs like suspension bikes, something which only becomes a necessity when you need improved wheel contact and is a waste up until that point.

I already know all about suspension dynamics, trust me. A tri bike doesn't need suspension. Neither does a touring bike, a commuter, most bikes don't. I know people who ride light XC without suspension. Suspension is a comfort up until the terrain is unreliable, and in the city passive suspension works just as well on roads and paths as shocks. The design on something like a Softbike isn't just aesthetics. I think you ride a 'bent right? Well, its the same way the LWB's tend to ride smooth. You probably already know this stuff already though.

Front suspension is much more practical for everyday use than rear. You retain more energy comparatively, and gain a larger traction advantage. For domestic applications it can easily be skipped and comfort can be retained, but its a case of user preference. In the city, my peugeot px-10 rides more comfortably than does my full suspension fuji 2 diamond. I won't be hopping any curbs on the peugeot though.

On rear suspension bicycles, there are a few typical solutions to the energy loss, none of which are cure-alls. Rebounds and isolated geometry are great solutions for allowing the rear shock to work during big hits, but they work against the benefit of the shock for the rider on terrain that causes vibrations like rocks or roots. Lockouts need to be manually actuated, which isn't so bad if you've got a bar mounted toggle, but these are all solutions to a problem that doesn't need to be had for the everyday rider. Rear shocks belong on bikes being used on aggressive terrain.

As for hub motors, I never said they were more efficient. But the belief some people have that they're wholly inefficient is silly. There's no drivetrain loss, and the rated efficiency on a hub motor is quite good. One mistake some users make is to purchase the wrong motor for the job, not choosing one for their particular locale and then needing considerably more amps to generate enough torque for their needs, reducing their range.

On the flipside, my 408 goes 66kms off a charge on my battery, the torque and speed outputs are perfect for the intended application. The larger difference between bb/hub comes from the fact that the bb motor is capable of adapting itself to a larger degree of terrain. There's much more of a difference in potential performance than there is overall efficiency.First of all I have never seen a 5 lb motor on any ebike drive that has ONLY a single sprocket reduction that can drive a three speed hub wheel efficiently in any of the three speeds provided in a slow moving gearbox with up to 1600 watts of efficient power..
Secondly riding on dirt trails and pot hole roads without a full suspension up steep inclines with mostly motor power a hardtail bike skips the wheel like a SOB besides baging the kidneys.Yea you guys with low power who like to race down hills on smooth roads as fast as you can while pedaling hard you can spend 1000s on lightweight bikes and unneeded components but for efficiency and smoothness WITHOUT the need to pedal you all loose and pay too much attention on the bike itself. While you may have a lightweight bike what kind weight are you talking for all the lead acid batteries and heavy hub motors or extra power robbing components used in multi reductions used in most bottom bracket drives ? I would say that with even using lithiums the Huffy would still have a better power to weight ratio with the drive system it has with less components at a much better efficiency at any ebike speed or condition.The perk is and always be in the efficiency of the motor and drive system. The bike it's self is secondary for efficiency unless your motor drive is minimal and you pedal for over 60% of your power needed to meet YOUR requirement.To get the best of both worlds in a light weight ebike how hard would it be to make a lightweight aluminum frame with full suspension and a motor and battery mount allowing for a 5 lb 1600 watt motor with programable power limits?

When i'm speaking about your huffy's weight, its in relation to how you mock the hub motor for being 15lbs, but pack an extra 10 onto your bicycle from having a far over-average weight system. It seems a bit hypocritical that you're talking about how easily all these people could save weight when you're packing an extra 10 with nothing but psychological gain? Alright, pick full suspension if you want, but go ask the mountain biking forum what they'd think about taking a huffy down the trails.

Whatever you choose, make the bike worth the kit, and make them work towards your needs. Full suspension for someone living in a city, carrying their things, and using the bike day in-day out is silly.

I think you've confused me for a roadie, unless you were just generalizing. I'm a college student, and I like my bikes to work. There's a world of difference between a bike that can be trusted to work and one that can't.

My 2001 fuji 2 cost $450 used. Its a full suspension, all mountain midweight. The other bike is made with a hardtail Rocky Mountain Concord frame from NYCbikes, A surly 1x1 fork, and a pile of various components between Alivio-LX. Neither of those bikes are pricey, extreme performers, lightweights, or head turners. What they are is reliable. And what these bikes let me do, is enjoy cycling on a decent rig while having a reliable system.

Were it to come down to different riding, i'd pick something else. But it would follow the same guidelines: pick what you need, pick a little more if you want, but never pick less.

When i'm speaking about your huffy's weight, its in relation to how you mock the hub motor for being 15lbs, but pack an extra 10 onto your bicycle from having a far over-average weight system. It seems a bit hypocritical that you're talking about how easily all these people could save weight when you're packing an extra 10 with nothing but psychological gain? Alright, pick full suspension if you want, but go ask the mountain biking forum what they'd think about taking a huffy down the trails.

Whatever you choose, make the bike worth the kit, and make them work towards your needs. Full suspension for someone living in a city, carrying their things, and using the bike day in-day out is silly.

I think you've confused me for a roadie, unless you were just generalizing. I'm a college student, and I like my bikes to work. There's a world of difference between a bike that can be trusted to work and one that can't.

My 2001 fuji 2 cost $450 used. Its a full suspension, all mountain midweight. The other bike is made with a hardtail Rocky Mountain Concord frame from NYCbikes, A surly 1x1 fork, and a pile of various components between Alivio-LX. Neither of those bikes are pricey, extreme performers, lightweights, or head turners. What they are is reliable. And what these bikes let me do, is enjoy cycling on a decent rig while having a reliable system.

Were it to come down to different riding, i'd pick something else. But it would follow the same guidelines: pick what you need, pick a little more if you want, but never pick less. Relibility, strength, and efficiency at any bike weight with the best efficiency at a good price were my goals to use in any conditions. With over 25,000 miles on the STRONG steel Huffy frame I did accomplish this. With a good strong motor any varations of frames can be used with quality wheels.How many ebikes do you know of that can constantly climb the steepest road in the world to 10,005 ft in elevation without bruning up and hold up dirtbiking on rough mountan trails for over 4 years without ANY maintenance other than batteries, brake pads, tires, and a few drops of oil ? Sure you can get a system for each style of riding but why not have ONE system for any kind of abuse you can give it ? hard tail, lightweight or otherwise ?

A huffy isn't a strong frame. http://spokesmanbicycles.com/page.cfm?pageID=329

Taken as an excerpt:

From now on, in the bicycle lexicon of this series, I'll be using 4130 and CrMo interchangeably, even though not all CrMo's are 4130. CrMo is by far the most common of all the steels used to build high- quality bicycle frames. And I'm making an assumption that the readers of VeloNews who ride steel frames aren't riding Muffy's (That's the generic name for the Murray-Huffy style of bike you can buy at those fine American institutions like Kmart and Wal-mart.) Muffy-grade steel is barely above rebar on the steel "food chain"; rebar is essentially a blend of melted 1956 Chevys, washing machines and shopping carts.

When you say dirtbiking, do you mean "riding on dirt", or "eating up drop verticals onto hardpack/rock"?
There's a big difference. One you can do with pretty much any kind of bike, the other is where you'll find out what the difference between strength in your frame and new false teeth look like.

As for the climb, I can think of a lot of bikes that could do it without modification. The Stokemonkey and Heinzmann would laugh at carrying *one* person up an incline for an extended period of time, it'd be quite possible on any system that didn't stray too far from nominal output as long as the battery capacity was adequate.

A huffy isn't a strong frame. http://spokesmanbicycles.com/page.cfm?pageID=329

Taken as an excerpt:

From now on, in the bicycle lexicon of this series, I'll be using 4130 and CrMo interchangeably, even though not all CrMo's are 4130. CrMo is by far the most common of all the steels used to build high- quality bicycle frames. And I'm making an assumption that the readers of VeloNews who ride steel frames aren't riding Muffy's (That's the generic name for the Murray-Huffy style of bike you can buy at those fine American institutions like Kmart and Wal-mart.) Muffy-grade steel is barely above rebar on the steel "food chain"; rebar is essentially a blend of melted 1956 Chevys, washing machines and shopping carts.

When you say dirtbiking, do you mean "riding on dirt", or "eating up drop verticals onto hardpack/rock"?
There's a big difference. One you can do with pretty much any kind of bike, the other is where you'll find out what the difference between strength in your frame and new false teeth look like.

As for the climb, I can think of a lot of bikes that could do it without modification. The Stokemonkey and Heinzmann would laugh at carrying *one* person up an incline for an extended period of time, it'd be quite possible on any system that didn't stray too far from nominal output as long as the battery capacity was adequate. So You Say! Try It!... lol.... as long as the battery capacity was adequate ? For amp robbing systems you suggested how much total battery weight would be adequate to average 12 mph up a 10,005 ft high mountain in 3 hours without the use of lithium batteries ?
YOU are in DREAMLAND! As far as frame strength on Huffy bikes being substandard YOU are also in cloud of your own reality.

So You Say! Try It!... lol.... as long as the battery capacity was adequate ? For amp robbing systems you suggested how much total battery weight would be adequate to average 12 mph up a 10,005 ft high mountain in 3 hours without the use of lithium batteries ?
YOU are in DREAMLAND! As far as frame strength on Huffy bikes being substandard YOU are also in cloud of your own reality.
I recently got a "Honda Racing" Trail Pilot fully suspended bike for $99 at K-mart. It works decent.
They are also available at SportMart:

http://www.sportmart.com/product/ind...4&cp=713103.88
7561.1212018&parentPage=family

According to the specs, it has Shimano derailleurs. There is another low-end fully suspended bike by
Huffy, for $20 more:
http://www.cyclingforums.com/archive/index.php/t-6049.html

I can't convince you apparently. Did you even read that link you posted though?

http://www.cyclingforums.com/archive/index.php/t-6049.html

If you read it farther than 2-3 posts, it turns into nothing but a slam-fest against these cheap FS bikes. Its not uncommon knowledge that these bikes are largely a joke. If you're honestly using these things for off-road applications, I fear for your life.

Edit: Ah, edited those links out did you? :)

Actually, I did forget about some of the newest suspension designs Liese, you're right in that some of them are really improving. I did a swap with a friend of mine for fun on one ride, his had an isolated linkage FSR design. Took the hits, but handled washboard conditions a lot more comfortably and didn't pogo unless you were sprinting.

Actually, I did forget about some of the newest suspension designs Liese, you're right in that some of them are really improving. I did a swap with a friend of mine for fun on one ride, his had an isolated linkage FSR design. Took the hits, but handled washboard conditions a lot more comfortably and didn't pogo unless you were sprinting.It helps to replase the spring with a real shock.

I wonder if you're being funny, or just clueless. I'm just not going to try with you anymore.

And where might one reasonably obtain a FW crank that won't cost more then the whole bike ...??? I wouldn't mind if it looked like a paperbike as long as it worked...and was reliable ..

Why hello you. :D

I think the real Racer-01 is a cabron fiber chassis cause i really don't see how you can get the part with the seat to work.

It would be interesting to create a replica but I have no clue how to build bike frames. I'm pretty good with electronics though.


ya the seat would be hard to make without problems i was thinking with just the standard dowtube
still would look good.

i found this http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/carbon_fiber.htm

http://www.tokyo-motorshow.com/show/2001/ENGLISH/PUBLIC/BOOTH/YMH/img/Racer-01.JPG

yes, a very slick looking bike indeed! i found these wheels that i will be using on my bb build bike. http://www.tagwheels.com/