that is a nice bike!:love:

Dittos on the nice bike Bradty. I just ordered an eBike build from ecospeed, seems they've done a lot of the hard work to make an efficient drive train. Mine will be a Sun LWB bent, not nearly as cool as yours, but at my age, waking up in the morning is cool <g>. Awesome great job man.

Thanks OrangeClown and MissLexi.
Yes the Ecospeed seems to be one of the better companies out there and I think they used some of my ideas!! ;) I probably used some of theirs too.. But I had to design mine in a way that worked for my bent, not that I didn't like their design, I just wanted my own. I'm not sure how they are doing their bearing system though. I used some ideas from my Charger bike and may use some more later on. I would like to make it a pedelec as I think it is useful at times, but also keep the throddle too.
Have fun with the bent. Oh btw, I'm probably older than you!?

Brad

Hubs are slightly more battery efficient than the most efficient chain drives, but

definately not faster! You make your pick: www.youtube.com/luc59457 Also

there is another system which is even more efficient than both hubs and chain

drives that uses no electricity. The E-bikes in the pictures below could achieve

much higher speeds if used the motor we used. See site above. 40+MPH or

60+km/h on only 36v 1000w Videos!

That Giant Xtracycle is a work of art, I'm so envious, and the background scenery conjures up fantasies about an verdant edenic paradise where everyone rides ebikes.

I've been trying to research and compare the Panasonic and Heinzmann high torque systems for cycling in my mountainous area. You say the Panasonic system produces significantly more torque then the hub motor and I'm not surprised. it makes sense that a bottom bracket drive would be stronger and probably more efficient, but recently I saw these two reviews on the web that seem to indicate that the Heinzmann is potentially better for hills.

Here the tester rates the Heinzmann with an assistance uphill factor of 8.5
http://www.extraenergy.org/main.php?...eg=103&id=1960

And here the tester rates the Panasonic system with an assistance uphill factor of only 3.4
http://www.extraenergy.org/main.php?...eg=101&id=1942

This test comparison seems to me counter-intuitive in its rating of torque and contradicts your experience with the two systems. I wonder if the Heinzmann motors are different, maybe your Estelle is a direct drive and the tested model has planetary gears inside? I had my heart set on a Panasonic-driven pedelec until I saw this test and then wondered if I should get the Heinzmann hub for retrofitting a high quality bike.

Some folks keep claiming that hub motors are more efficient. I would like to know their source for this info because it goes against everything I have experienced. Hub motors have their place but the 'most efficient' is not one of them.

I was at PIR last May 2008. I was also a racer there. Brent did indeed win his division however he was the only one in his division. That goes for all of us who raced last year. I won my division. What Brent did win was his bike being voted the most practical. Brent claimed that he used 24Wh/mi with an average speed of 35mph. With my C'lyte hub motor I had an average speed of 31mph using 14.12Wh/mi. We both were riding in the streamline class. I was ridding a streamlined trike and Brent had his Goldrush LWB with a fairing and body sock. There was another bike racing that had an ecospeed system. He had either the fourth fastest speed. A mountain bike with a C'lyte 5x series was third fastest. I don't know what his watt hour usage was. He didn't have a meter. Pictures can be seen on my flickr account. The set is called ePower Challenge 2008.
www.flickr.com/wmbates/sets.

Brent B....faired LWB w/tail sock.......ecospeed.....................3030 sec 15 laps 202.000 lap 3.366 min/lap
Bill B.......faired trike (velomobile)......C'lyte 4x hubmotor......2710 sec 12 laps 225.833 lap 3.763 min/lap
Cal B......mountain bike.....................C'lyte 5x hub motor.....5714 sec 20 laps 285.700 lap 4.761 min/lap
Bill S.......recumbent Trek SWB..........ecospeed.....................3252 sec 10 laps 325.200 lap 5.420 min/lap
Mitch S...faired trike (velomobile)......BionX hubmotor...........3216 sec 9 laps 357.333 lap 5.955 min/lap

Brent and I were the only ones as I recall that had a meter on our bikes. Brent's stats were posted on his web site. I matched up my information in the same format as he had posted. I do question his numbers though. It's hard to imagine that he used 700Wh from a pack that only had 720Wh available. I would think that his pack was larger than what he claimed or he used less watt hours than he claims.

Brent B GRR faired and full tail sock running 36vLi 20Ah with an EcoSpeed drive system
Distance: 15 laps (29.7 miles),
time: 50 min,
30 sec., Avg.: 35.3 mph,
Max Speed: 42 mph,
energy used: 700 Wh,
Usage per mile: 24 Wh

Bill B WAW velomobile running 48v AGM 18Ah with Crystalyte 406 20Ah controller
Distance: 12 laps (23.76 miles)
time: 45 min,
10 sec., Ave 31.1 mph,
Max Speed 34.2 mph,
energy used 335.7 Wh,
Usage per mile 14.12 Wh/

I think that 10Wh/mi or just under is a huge difference. My velo (trike) weighed in at 348lbs including myself. I don't know the weight of Brent and his bike. Now if there had been some hills to climb I have no doubt that my watt hours would have shot through the ceiling and Brent's bike would have been more efficient. On the whole I think that a motor driving the rear wheel through the gears is better than a direct drive hubmotor. On the other hand a direct drive hubmotor has only a few moving parts to wear out and a hubmotor is much easier to install in most bikes. As Ron Popiel would say "set it and forget it"

On a side note we (OHPV) are/is starting to make plans for next May's ePower Challenge. We are trying to source watt hour meters for those who lack them. If the bikes had meters then they wouldn't be regulated to certain divisions based on the watt hour of their pack. Feedback or suggestions can be made on the OHPV (Oregon Human Powered Vehicles) Yahoo group site.

Bill
Portland, Oregon

Thanks, Bill, that is very useful info. It would be great to also see a hilly course used with meters.

A road course race has been mentioned several times before but personally I don't see it happening. At least not one sponsored by OHPV. There's a current and ongoing thread on Yahoo Power-Assist on this subject.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/p.../message/77298
I'm not sure if you have to register or not to read the thread. The discussion about a road race starts about a third of the way into the thread.

From what I see there appears to be two obstacles involved.

First is insurance. It took three years to find an underwriter willing to take a chance on us. What's funny is that our bike insurance wouldn't cover us because we had motors and the Electrathon peoples insurance, who we share PIR with on Memorial Day weekend wouldn't cover us because we had pedals.

Second is having a safe race course. ie: closing down the road for the racers.

OHPV doesn't want and will not expose themselves to the liabilities of promoting and/or running a race without the proper procedures in place.

If you curious here is a thread from E-S forums from last year's ePower Challenge.
http://endless-sphere.com/forums/vie...st=0&sk=t&sd=a

Hub motors and bottom bracket motors have different things going for them.

b.b. motors drive through a reduction gear (which is less than 100% efficient) and then the bicycle chain (which is less than 100% efficient, especially if it's dirty). gearless hubmotors have neither.

Gear reduction (which is installed with some hub motors and all bottom bracket motors) makes a motor spin faster, which makes it more able to operate efficiently at a variety of speeds and reduces the size/weight of the motor, as compared to its power output (and this may slightly increase efficiency, again). Running a motor's power through a multi-speed gear system, again, makes the motor more able to operate efficiently at a variety of speeds...... as long as the gearing is chosen correctly.

Overall, efficiency isn't much different between geared hub-motors, gearless hub-motors, and bottom bracket motors - it just depends on the situation.

If you want to have good power and efficiency at a wider variety of speeds, gearless hubmotors are at a disadvantage. If you want a motor that's silent, has fewer breakable parts, and may be more efficient if you always run it close to its ideal speed.... gearless hubmotors are a good choice.

cerewa: and may be more efficient if you always run it close to its ideal speed.... gearless hubmotors are a good choice. Totally agreed.