[HN Gopher] Greg LeMond's New 26 LB. Carbon Fiber Ebike
___________________________________________________________________
Greg LeMond's New 26 LB. Carbon Fiber Ebike
Author : gjlemond
Score : 91 points
Date : 2020-11-27 16:06 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (lemond.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (lemond.com)
| anonAndOn wrote:
| It's a very nice looking bike. However, as a bike commuter I
| prefer something that can handle the bumps and scratches of being
| in a bike rack next to other commuters which is one reason why I
| ride aluminum frames (the other being cost). Build this in
| aluminum and drop the sticker price and you are approaching the
| e-bike holy trinity of affordability, durability and usability.
|
| ps - if gjlemond is actually Greg... holy crap! You are an
| inspiration, sir.[0]
|
| [0]https://www.bicycling.com/tour-de-france/a27681555/greg-
| lemo...
| knolan wrote:
| At that price they're competing with the Specialized Vado SL
| which weights 33 pounds. I've a regular Vado 4.0, which is much
| heavier, that I use for my 25 km commute. Granted this a lot
| cheaper than the Creo but you're getting a known quantity when
| you buy a Specialized system.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| Does it need AWS for it to work?
| an_opabinia wrote:
| A lot of people coming in and poo pooing a very nice, very well
| designed bike. Very pretty and conventional looking. At this
| price range it's more comparable to a Stromer, which is at once a
| much more vehicle-replacement oriented bike but also a bike that
| _looks_ like a "Das Bike."
|
| It would be nice if this bike had insurance and tracking like the
| Vanmoofs do. As an owner of two and knowing other owners, this is
| a dealbreaker. One guy has even gotten his X3 chopped by kleptos,
| and is now enjoying his new free replacement bike.
|
| This definitely competes for looks though.
| giardini wrote:
| Why call it "Prolog" - there's a once-commonly-used AI computer
| language with that name?
|
| Bad, bad choice!
| cranekam wrote:
| Bicycle stage races often have a "prologue" (typically a short
| time trial) before the regular racing of long, full-day starts.
| That is probably the inspiration for the name, and "prolog" is
| just an unconventional marketing spelling of it.
| fiftyacorn wrote:
| Great to see the lemond brand back after that armstrong stuff
|
| Lemond was always a big hero of mine
| jeffbee wrote:
| Seems pretty OK, I personally do prefer hub motor ebikes over
| mid-drive, but without any lugs for racks I don't know if this is
| truly the pinnacle of versatility. Also the handlebar is not the
| right place to mount the front light. I don't know why
| manufacturers keep making this mistake. I guess it's because
| Americans just don't understand the bicycle as a utility vehicle.
| The light belongs on the fork crown.
| dayofthedaleks wrote:
| Thanks for pointing out the lack of rack attachment points.
| That is a design failure.
| gjlemond wrote:
| There are bosses in the rear and fork that serve as rack and
| basket attachment points. Both rack and baskets are carbon to
| offer stiffness while maintaining a lightweight build. Love
| the commentary!
| dayofthedaleks wrote:
| Appreciate the clarification. Sounds like it has the
| ability to take panniers if need be.
| compiler-guy wrote:
| The lights are built in, so the handlebars are irrelevant.
| jeffbee wrote:
| So? The lights are also integrated on a VanMoof, but they're
| integrated in the right place.
|
| They used to put them in the right place on the Specialized
| Turbo but in the latest models they moved it up the the bar
| again, can't imagine why.
| compiler-guy wrote:
| So complaining that they don't have the right mount point
| for a light when one doesn't need to be mounted shows that
| the product either isn't a good fit for you, or that you
| are grasping at straws.
|
| I think it is unlikely that a carefully designed bike like
| this missed something simple like that. Much more likely
| you are kissing something.
| jeffbee wrote:
| It's a simple matter of geometry. The bar is too high for
| the light to effectively light the road.
| taude wrote:
| Why wouldn't the lights be tilted down from the bars? I
| have external lights on my bike that are mounted ABOVE
| the handlebars, and don't seem to have any problem
| illuminating the road in front of me?
| YawningAngel wrote:
| I'm always confused by people of working age who ride bikes like
| this. What's the attraction of a more expensive and heavier bike
| that's no faster than pedaling yourself?
| technofiend wrote:
| Yeah excellent question. Hot and humid climates make this
| appealing if you don't need to pedal; perhaps you can get to
| work without needing a shower. But considering the likely cost
| due to name, weight and components it feels very niche
| nonetheless. It's difficult to justify a bike that's thousands
| when an annual bus pass might be a few hundred.
| masklinn wrote:
| > It's difficult to justify a bike that's thousands when an
| annual bus pass might be a few hundred.
|
| 2000 is table stakes for quality ebikes.
| kazinator wrote:
| > _It 's difficult to justify a bike that's thousands when an
| annual bus pass might be a few hundred._
|
| - A bike is not _annually_ thousands. A good quality bike
| will last you a decade or more. Not with $0 maintenance, but
| not hundreds per year.
|
| - Commute times on a bike are shorter than the bus. I'm not
| even talking e-bike now. Due to traffic congestion effects
| (that hardly affect bicycles at all), you can beat even
| automobile commuting on a plain human-powered bike. With the
| e-bike in the equation, it can be no contest. You can go
| 40-50 km/h for most of the commute, and zip around bumper-to-
| bumper traffic like it's not there.
|
| - Convenience: hop on it and go anywhere you want, at any
| time. No waiting. E.g. go out for lunch in the middle of the
| workday.
|
| - Transit is a good place to catch viruses from people.
| Complete non-starter in this pandemic.
|
| - Transit is a good place to be assaulted, robbed and exposed
| to cigarette smoke.
|
| - The bike offers freedom from irritating and depressing
| exposure to people from socially incompatible classes. (Well
| almost; there are some drivers out there: but you're not
| sitting next to them for 30 minutes.)
| kazinator wrote:
| The speed restrictions are a complete lie, and only in the
| firmware. Users are obviously working around them.
|
| I've never seen an e-bike rider who was not whooping ass.
|
| They usually go at least 40 km/h, which most pedal cyclists can
| barely reach, let alone sustain, and the e-cyclists can keep up
| the pace going up hills.
|
| E-bikes are pedal-assist, which means you get the combined
| wattage from your legs and the motor. You have more combined
| wattage than a Tour de France competitor.
| knolan wrote:
| Distance. I travel 25 km to work. In my previous job I only
| cycled 7 km, it was easy and took about 15 mins. Then when I
| changed job my commute was 18 km, it was manageable, and better
| than the two infrequent buses I would have to try and catch but
| you would be pretty tired at the end of the week. It would take
| between 45 and 55 minutes depending on weather and traffic.
|
| We recently bought our first home and this meant we had to move
| a little further away resulting in my current 25 km commute.
| The 90 minute bus trip is exhausting and you arrive at work and
| return home groggy.
|
| On my ebike I can get to work in 50 minutes and still feel like
| I've exercised without depleting too much energy.
| ginko wrote:
| You don't have to pedal yourself.
| madeofpalk wrote:
| For what it's worth, you do have to pedal yourself (its
| e-assist), but you just don't have to pedal as hard.
| kazinator wrote:
| This is not what I see; these things go-go-go, even if the
| rider puts out no effort. I see people going over 40 km/h
| on e-bikes while basically just barely pretending to pedal.
| madeofpalk wrote:
| This is not true. Have you ever used one?
|
| _I own one_ and cycle with it daily.
|
| It takes less effort to cycle, and so you can get faster
| speeds easier - my Vanmook would get it 30kmph with
| medium effort effort on flat roads, but then i can coast
| on that for a bit as it slows down (its not maintaining
| this speed through a motor) .
| jeffbee wrote:
| A typical bicycle rider only exerts about 100W. A bike with a
| 250W motor will more than triple your output. I don't know why
| this rig is limited to 20 MPH, other than they must have wanted
| to qualify for "class 2" regulation. It is probably powerful
| enough to act as a class 3 bike, with a software change.
| globular-toast wrote:
| Having the electric motor for assistance up hills makes cycling
| significantly easier and more accessible. It's claimed that you
| can turn up at work without breaking a sweat. Also laziness.
| fmajid wrote:
| In a place like San Francisco, being able to eat hills with
| electric assist is a game-changer.
| compiler-guy wrote:
| Lower effort means easier commutes and less sweat. That can be
| very useful for an office worker without a shower or time for a
| shower at the other end. Easier to take hills and such as well.
| pgt wrote:
| All roads lead to Prolog :) (that's the name of the bike model -
| not in the post title)
| _verandaguy wrote:
| Coming from conventional bikes, I don't understand who this is
| for.
|
| Carbon fibre frames are prohibitively expensive and the market
| for them serves very involved, often professional or semi-pro
| cyclists whose performance bottlenecks are imposed by the bike
| instead of themselves. Ditto for some of the other details on the
| bike, like the medium-dish carbon rims -- all for the sake of
| weight savings and aerodynamics (since carbon bikes will usually
| integrate things like formed handlebars and seat tubes, etc).
|
| Suffice it to say, you'd rarely see a commuter using a carbon
| bike.
|
| This bike, though, feels like a bit of an oxymoron. Expensive
| carbon frame with none of the aero features you'd usually see on
| one, including conventional handlebars.
|
| A lightweight carbon frame weighed down by a battery.
|
| High-performance rims and tyres but only one chain ring.
|
| Low-profile seat stays with mud guards on both wheels.
|
| A utilitarian, commuter feature set with a price tag that makes
| no sense at all.
| andor wrote:
| _Carbon fibre frames are prohibitively expensive_
|
| That's not necessarily true. Most carbon frames are expensive
| because they are high-end models, not because of the material
| itself.
|
| I would be worried about durability though, if this is used
| like other commuter bikes. Carbon frames usually come warnings
| to not lean them against sharp objects, not sit on the top
| tube, etc. Unlike metals, the fibers are only strong in one
| direction. Anyone bumping into this bike by accident, e.g. when
| locking it against the same rack, might cause damage to the
| frame.
| chrisbennet wrote:
| As a data point, my 2006 (carbon frame) Ibis Mojo mountain
| bike has seen quite a few crashes (in the woods) without
| sustaining any real damage. Maybe mountain bikes are less
| delicate?
| vwoolf wrote:
| All of what you say is true, and it's stupid expensive but also
| aesthetically incredible and super light. I'd buy one if I had
| stupid money to throw away. I don't, so I won't, but the appeal
| is there.
| phamilton wrote:
| It's for the wealthy cyclist who is slowing down but still
| wants to ride with their crew.
|
| I know a few guys like that, mostly for mountain biking, but
| they also buy them for their wives so they can go for a ride
| together.
| davycro wrote:
| I commute on a specialized turbo vado sl, a similar lightweight
| e-bike. An electric bicycle this light will handle more like a
| conventional bicycle, and it's easier to lift up steps or load
| onto bike racks.
|
| This bicycle looks less cartoonish than my specialized, weighs
| less, and costs about the same.
| taude wrote:
| I'm waiting to buy into a sleak looking, sub 30 pound e-bike
| for commuting. I'll probably pay up to $3K for such a bike.
| There's advantages to having it be an e-bike over just buying a
| scooter or such, like storage, parking downtown, etc. so it'll
| be pretty easy for me to justify a budget for a bike, as long
| as it's nice.
|
| I don't really like the external gearing of this bike, and not
| sure it needs standard Di2 type of components for shifting and
| whatnot....
|
| This bike looks about 10x better than almost every other e-bike
| I've seen, so far. I'm sure we're about to see a lot of
| improvement in the next couple years of e-bike styling and
| tech...
| pletnes wrote:
| We have 1 car and 2 electric bikes rather than 2 cars. If you
| can reduce your car count, anything is worth it, give or take.
| multjoy wrote:
| > Carbon fibre frames are prohibitively expensive
|
| Uh, no?
| unethical_ban wrote:
| >A lightweight carbon frame weighed down by a battery.
|
| That's the entire point! To make an electric bike that weighs
| the same as a conventional bike. My aluminum frame road bike
| weighs about 23-24lbs, so having a 45-mile-range ebike weigh
| about the same is really cool.
|
| And just like any emerging market, no, it isn't meant to be for
| the masses day 1, just as the Model S wasn't. This is
| iterative.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| One chain ring is the new thing these days, with 11+ cog
| cassettes.
|
| Lack of aero shape probably facilitates putting the battery in
| there. Though they could do the handle bars and seat stays at
| least.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| 1x is a cost reduction measure disguised as a "new thing".
| Same price - less components = more profit.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| I very much doubt that's true, as evidenced by cheaper
| bikes still sporting 3x chainrings. 1x is entirely about
| removing the front derailleur and all its associated
| complication. It's especially common in mountain bikes
| because they experience a lot more opportunity to break.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| That's what the bike industry wants people to believe so
| they have motivation to buy upgrades. 3x cranks weren't
| dropping like flies for 99.9% of users.
|
| Their MO is to always come up with what's going to be the
| latest new thing then use the media outlets to pump their
| idea to boost sales. Same thing is happening with the
| forced imposition of disc brakes on road bikes. Then it's
| going to be hookless rims that can only handle 75 psi
| max.
| [deleted]
| jjav wrote:
| > Carbon fibre frames are prohibitively expensive
|
| Back in the 90s, yes.
|
| Carbon frames are the mainstream now and have been for at least
| the last decade.
|
| > I don't understand who this is for
|
| I'd consider it if I was still commuting longer distances but
| covid put a stop to that. The range is a bit too short but if
| the additional external battery really delivers 70% more range
| as claimed, it would be a great fit for what used to be my
| commute.
| [deleted]
| woah wrote:
| Ever carried a bike up some stairs???
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| Carbon frames aren't prohibitively expensive. Almost all of
| them are made in Taiwan or mainland China now and you can get
| cheap frames from the same factories that make the expensive
| ones. There was a time when carbon _forks_ were expensive. They
| became commoditized 20 years ago. The same has happened now
| with the rest of the bike.
| cranekam wrote:
| I agree with the overall sentiment -- who is this for? -- but:
|
| > carbon fibre frames are prohibitively expensive and the
| market for them serves very involved, often professional or
| semi-pro cyclists whose performance bottlenecks are imposed by
| the bike instead of themselves.
|
| just isn't true. Many hobbyist/amateur/weekend warrior-type
| cyclist ride carbon bikes. They can be had at lowish prices (my
| first was PS1000) to multiples of the price of this Lemond
| ebike. Almost all owners of such bikes are limited by their own
| ability, not the bike.
|
| It's probably fair to assume a lightweight, high quality ebike
| would be pricey. Perhaps being carbon adds a bit more to the
| price but the material choice alone isn't totally ridiculous.
|
| > High-performance rims and tyres but only one chain ring.
|
| Single-ring setups with a wide-range rear cassette are actually
| a pretty good choice for a commuter bike. Less maintenance,
| less weight. A double chainring setup likely offers smaller
| gaps between gears but likely a comparable overall range from
| lowest to highest. On a commuter bike simplicity wins.
|
| I guess ultimately this bike is some combination of publicity
| stunt and Veblen good. I can't imagine Lemond anticipates
| selling many of them.
| kwaugh wrote:
| > A double chainring setup likely offers smaller gaps between
| gears but likely a comparable overall range from lowest to
| highest.
|
| This isn't true. This bike is using a 40 gear crank in the
| front with an 11-40 cassette in the back. That puts the gear
| ratio at 1.0 on the low end and 3.64 on the high end. The
| corresponding Shimano GRX setup with a double chainring would
| be a 46-30 in the front and a 11-34 in the back. This gives a
| 0.88 ratio on the low end and 4.18 on the high end, which is
| actually quite a big difference. One could argue that the
| difference in gear ratio on the low end isn't a big deal
| because this bike has pedal assist, but the difference on the
| high end is quite noticeable.
| ncmncm wrote:
| Only if you're in a hurry.
| portlander52232 wrote:
| You can buy a carbon bike at any mainstream bike shop, they
| aren't just for pros anymore. I ride one because it feels
| amazingly sporty. I'm an enthusiast but not very athletic. The
| super light, stiff bike is just fun to ride.
|
| The aero features like integrate stem and bars is mostly found
| on time-trial and triathlon bikes. In contrast you can get
| conventional road bikes, gravel bikes, and mountain bikes in
| carbon at any nice bike shop.
| johnofthesea wrote:
| And if you buy directly from brands that do not sell through
| local shops (like Dare or Canyon) it can be even cheaper.
|
| I commute on my carbon frame bike and use steel one only in
| winter now.
| semi-extrinsic wrote:
| > whose performance bottlenecks are imposed by the bike instead
| of themselves
|
| I'm a fluid dynamics researcher, and I'll tell you the money
| these people spend on "aero" and "weight saving" and "higher
| drivetrain efficiency" stuff is 99.9% snake oil. Unless you are
| among the top 1000 road bike racers in the world.
|
| Increasing your exercise load by half an hour per week, or
| spending a little time understanding and implementing
| aerodynamically efficient body posture or other forms of
| technique, will both yield improvements that are several orders
| of magnitude higher than the marginal improvements achieved by
| spending $$$ on "aero" and carbon fiber.
|
| I've seen detailed calculations of rider performance that
| indicate a 500 g saving in frame weight (which is huge), over
| the course of a 120 km race with 1200 m climb, will save you a
| whopping total of 15 seconds on ~4 hours of race time.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| aero changes can be quite substantive even for amateurs. on
| the order of a minute or so per 40k tt
|
| aero equipment and position and training are all orthogonal
| so it isn't a question of picking just one.
| masklinn wrote:
| > I'm a fluid dynamics researcher, and I'll tell you the
| money these people spend on "aero" and "weight saving" and
| "higher drivetrain efficiency" stuff is 99.9% snake oil.
| Unless you are among the top 1000 road bike racers in the
| world.
|
| So, biking audiophilia.
| hazeii wrote:
| >spending a little time understanding and implementing
| aerodynamically efficient body posture
|
| You might be interested in what we're up to [0], get in touch
| if it interests you.
|
| [0] https://bodyrocket.cc
| ncmncm wrote:
| I don't understand why you need to measure anything but
| instantaneous crank torque, speed, and (for completeness)
| pitch angle. Integrating power in vs acceleration out, the
| difference is loss. What am I missing? Does bad posture
| waste energy before it reaches the crank?
| semi-extrinsic wrote:
| Ooo, nice. This is quite clever - still will require
| insight and effort from the rider, but it should be less of
| a shot in the dark, if it works. I'm not in your target
| market personally, but I like the approach.
|
| Are you going all out with triaxial load in the seat post,
| or uniaxial (posterior)?
| hazeii wrote:
| You're asking the right sort of question :)
|
| Seatpost is actually one of the simpler sensors, without
| giving too much away it's sensing force in 4 different
| directions.
| mariodiana wrote:
| My understanding is that weight saved on anything that
| rotates has an even bigger impact, but that doesn't change
| what you've said. The vast majority of posers bragging about
| the 500 grams they've saved in parts are carrying an extra 10
| pounds on their _own_ frame.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| the rotating weight thing is mostly myth, while true
| cyclists don't accelerate hard enough for it to amount to
| anything substantive. source: i did the math in excel
| Matthias247 wrote:
| Apart from the motor and a straight handlebar the bike pretty
| much fits into the gravel bike category, which is doing
| extremely well at the moment.
|
| Those are rather versatile bikes, which one can use for
| anything between commuting, bikepacking and not-fully-
| competitive road racing. At least the mid-range bikes in this
| category are already out of carbon. It's far more common than
| exocitic nowadays.
|
| The price of 4500$ actually doesn't feel too excessive, given
| that a Specialized Diverge with similar components is 3900$
| (https://www.specialized.com/us/en/diverge-comp-
| carbon/p/1752...) - without a motor. But ok - Specialized is
| also one of the most expensive brands.
|
| I bought a gravel bike this year (Trek Checkpoint), and I'm
| very happy with it. If I would have a strong use-case for an
| e-bike - like a longer commute - I would definitely consider
| something like that Prolog.
| bloat wrote:
| Carbon fibre bikes are very common in my circles, i.e. very
| amateur middle aged club cyclists. Nothing to do with
| professionals, semi or otherwise. Also see plenty of them when
| commuting in London.
| altarius wrote:
| Carbon fiber frames are now quite common in mountain biking and
| road biking, many enthusiasts (just quite average riders) buy
| them.
|
| I think this bike for wealthy commuters and city dwellers,
| could replace public transit or Uber rides. People seem to have
| taken up cycling in cities due to the risk of riding on public
| transit. And as someone else said, taking a 50+lbs (25kg)
| e-bike inside or even upstairs is a pain.
|
| But I think most of all, this is sort of a "halo" product - the
| best bike they could build, probably very expensive, but "sexy"
| and definitely news-worthy - as this HN submission has shown.
| And in the future they can launch cheaper alu-framed versions
| of this bike when this bike has established LeMond's e-bike
| reputation.
| string wrote:
| Plenty of cyclists in central London have carbon fibre commuter
| bikes and wear lycra and cleats for a sub-20 mile ride,
| stopping traffic lights every 2 minutes. I don't think logic
| has much to do with how most people choose cycling gear.
| robert_foss wrote:
| > A lightweight carbon frame weighed down by a battery.
|
| My thoughts exactly. Who's the target audience? And at that
| price point?
| jeffbee wrote:
| The price point is comparable to the Specialized Turbo Vado 5
| SL, a third-generation e-bike from another American company.
| The weight savings can make a big difference when you have to
| carry your bike up stairs or bring it on a train. Keep in
| mind that e-bikes compete with cars.
| robert_foss wrote:
| Maybe you're right. The Specialized Turbo Vado 5 SL seems
| to be 14.6kg, and this bike 11.8kg. If they're otherwise
| comparable maybe this bike actually makes some sense.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Both are lighter than most. Many e-bikes are over 50
| pounds, sometimes way over. The Rad Runner is 75 pounds,
| the Strommer ST3 is 72 pounds, etc.
| benmanns wrote:
| I have an older ebike with a large battery and it is
| outrageously heavy and hard to handle for everything except the
| actual ride. Perhaps there's a market for people who want an
| ebike that's a little easier to get up apartment stairs? For
| riding I don't see a need.
| roflc0ptic wrote:
| A few months ago a friend fell off the wagon and was
| drunkenly riding his electric bike around town, and called in
| distress. I picked him up, and put his electric bike on my
| bike rack. I could barely lift it onto the bike rack, and on
| the ride home, I took a speed bump and it broke my bike rack.
| I live on a second floor, and ended up having to leave his
| bike in the stairwell. I would never use his bike because it
| was so unwieldy.
|
| I _absolutely_ see a use case for a motorized bike that
| weighs 26 lbs, and it's the use case they lay out in their ad
| copy: it widens the accessibility of electric bikes. Maybe
| the tech costs too much, and that will hose the project, but
| the value prop is crystal clear to me.
| ebg13 wrote:
| > _Perhaps there's a market for people who want an ebike
| that's a little easier to get up apartment stairs?_
|
| A detachable battery might also help with this.
| ianhowson wrote:
| Or an aluminum frame that can deal with being banged around
| a little.
| frenchy wrote:
| Your partner might not like what that does to the
| apartment walls.
| ianhowson wrote:
| If my partner leaves, there's more room for bikes!
| boomskats wrote:
| In Europe a lot of the Bosch/Yamaha bikes have the so-
| called 'walk mode', where you hold down a button and the
| bike powers itself up whatever slope at walking pace.
|
| For some reason I understand this mode is illegal in the
| US, but it makes all the difference over here - especially
| when going up stairs (or other 45 degree slopes).
| hated wrote:
| If anything USA ebike laws are the most lenient in the
| world
| davycro wrote:
| My specialized has a walk mode. Not illegal in the states
| aidenn0 wrote:
| My RadWagon has a walk mode, I'm pretty big though so
| never needed to use it.
| pletnes wrote:
| The battery on my bike is perhaps 2 kg with the bike in
| total perhaps 26 ish. Removing the battery does not help
| except for hosing down a dirty bike or preventing theft of
| the battery.
| ols wrote:
| It feels like you are not really following the trends in bike
| designs.
|
| Carbon frames are really common now, and are available in mid-
| range road, mountain or gravel bikes. You can even order one on
| AliExpress for cheap and build a decent road bike around it.
| And it's not only the weight that carbon frame bike owners are
| after - the material gives much better ride quality than
| aluminium.
|
| Deep rims are nothing spectacular either, their weight penalty
| is nicely offset by aero gains, and this effect is noticable
| even at non-pro speeds. With disc brakes there is less concern
| about the longevity of the carbon rim - so why not use it?
|
| One chainring is all the rage in bikes now - since the advent
| of super-wide casettes with multiple cogs (reaching 13!) there
| is no real need to add a front deralieur. It's a component that
| breaks down frequently, multiple chainrings weight a lot, the
| chain wears down more... The recent popularity of 1x11 or 1x12
| drives is very well-deserved.
|
| Mudguards and simple handlebars make this bike utilitarian and
| well-suited to commuting, while the other stuff is a collection
| of things that are common and highly praised by cyclists
| nowadays.
| kwaugh wrote:
| I mean no offense, but many of the advantages that you've
| cited are more of claimed advantages from the marketing
| departments of big manufacturer rather than proven advantages
| that the tech gives you. The author of the comment to which
| you replied does seem to understand the trends in bike
| designs these days and feels that these trends do not fit
| well into the market segment of e-bikes. I agree.
|
| > it's not only the weight that carbon frame bike owners are
| after - the material gives much better ride quality than
| aluminium.
|
| The affect the frame has on the ride quality is significantly
| smaller than other components of the ride like the tires and
| seat post[0]. Carbon often has a very small weight
| improvement over a well made steel or aluminum bikes, so if
| you're buying an e-bike because you want pedal assist, I
| don't understand the need to shave 1 or 2 pounds off the
| bike.
|
| > Deep rims are nothing spectacular either, their weight
| penalty is nicely offset by aero gain.
|
| This appears to be true. Most of the aero penalty of the bike
| comes from the wheels and having deeper wheels does reduce
| the drag a lot.
|
| > One chainring is all the rage in bikes now
|
| It is all the rage, but it's not clear yet whether it's
| justified or just a ploy by the manufacturers to save costs
| on their end. The gear ratio of this bike goes from 1.0 on
| the low end to only 3.64. 1.0 is pretty good for going up
| hills, especially with the motor assist, but 3.64 is really
| low, especially for a bike trying to tout itself as really
| fast! I don't understand this choice. Most road bikes have a
| top end ratio of around 4.54.
|
| > Mudguards and simple handlebars make this bike utilitarian
| and well-suited to commuting
|
| The mudguards are nice, but I don't understand the choice of
| handlebars. Why do you want a super aero light-weight bike
| but then put flat handlebars on it so you can't get in an
| aero position like you can with drop handlebars. This doesn't
| make sense. Furthermore, the bike doesn't have mounting
| points for a front or rear rack, which is a huge downside for
| commuting, if not a dealbreaker.
|
| [0] https://www.cyclingabout.com/why-impossible-steel-frames-
| mor...
|
| [edit] you're right that trends do matter when affecting
| people's purchasing decision since most people aren't very
| informed about the actual pros/cons of the tech they're
| buying, but this doesn't undermine the original commenter's
| opinion that this bike doesn't make sense from a technical
| standpoint.
| ols wrote:
| I agree with most of your points, especially that the
| demand is strongly influenced by marketing/fashion and
| percieved values of the product, not objective ones.
|
| Diving deeper into gears and handlebars - I believe it's a
| very consious choice.
|
| - max speed with an optimal cadence (90 rpm) in this setup
| seems to be around 43km/h. This is plenty fast and
| definetely above typical commuting speeds. Even the
| electric support is more about better range/less sweat than
| making the bike fast, speeds appproaching 50km/h are close
| to the legal limits anyway
|
| - with straight handlebars it's comfortable to ride, no
| matter the level of personal fitness. Drop bars make you
| bend more - this isn't very inviting and could drive off
| the customers that are accustomed to relaxed positions
| (that they know from riding in their SUVs daily). And with
| speeds mostly well below 40km/h there is no need to curl
| into the aero postion. Just put on some trendy glasses and
| the electric support will deal with the extra drag.
|
| It really goes hand in hand and I'd be suprised if such
| bike would be released in other config.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| E-bikes are perhaps the most misunderstood category of bike
| products right now.
|
| Traditional bikers have underestimated demand for e-bikes at
| every step of the way for one reason: Traditional biking has a
| massive selection bias effect that excludes anyone who isn't in
| great physical shape. The deeper you are into cycling, the more
| homogenous your perception of what constitutes a biker.
|
| You're not going to see average consumers at the top of 20-mile
| mountain bike trail with steep terrain at 7AM. You're only
| going to see equally enthusiastic bikers who are highly trained
| and discipline. It leads to a stereotype that these are the
| only people who care to spend a lot of money on bikes.
|
| E-bikes turn that assumption upside down. They offset the
| physical fitness requirements and blow the doors wide open for
| anyone and everyone who wants to spend their way into the
| sport. Now those previously unreachable heights can be accessed
| by anyone with a credit card. It's no longer just a niche hobby
| exclusive to those who can put years into building up their
| fitness and bike knowledge.
|
| The total addressable market of e-bikes is much greater than
| the total addressable market of conventional high end bikes for
| that reason.
|
| Ironically, this is creating a lot of animosity among
| traditional bikers. Previously, the most difficult uphill
| trails were lightly trafficked because only a select few could
| ride them. It was satisfying to be one of the few people at the
| top of a difficult trail at sunrise. Now, it's not uncommon to
| be passed on the uphills by many people who are visibly out of
| shape, but use e-bikes to make up the difference (and then
| some). Some people are even hacking their e-bikes for more
| power or to allow power application without pedaling, turning
| them into electric dirt bikes that tear up trails. This is why
| we have so much regulation clamping down on e-bike access right
| now. Those regulations might be the biggest modulator in the
| size of the e-bike market.
| throwaway1777 wrote:
| Reminds me of when drones took off. Regulations took a while
| to catch up. At one point it was a huge nuisance with people
| flying little drones in every park. Fortunately now it's died
| down with regulations and general knowledge of what's
| acceptable, and I agree the same will happen with ebikes.
| hated wrote:
| Did regulation reduce drone usage? Or just lack of
| interest?
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| I think you're missing his point. He wasn't saying e-bikes
| were bad or pointless, he was saying that the design
| decisions made around this bike don't make sense for an
| e-bike commuter or a performance racer or basically anyone.
| I'm similarly confused.
| tedivm wrote:
| I think you and op are missing the point though. This is a
| light weight ebike! Obviously it's not as light weight as a
| professional bike (or like any without a battery), but this
| cuts weight everywhere it can and still has a 45 mile range
| (plus an extended battery you can add on to extend the
| range).
|
| On top of that people are already spending thousands of
| dollars on ebikes- this really isn't that much more
| expensive than a much shittier version. The "best ebike"
| according to Wired last year is the exact same price as
| this one but weighs five pounds more.
| nroets wrote:
| I agree with you entirely, BUT
|
| Isn't this how Tesla started ? A sportscar with subpar
| performance and impractical for many journeys due to limited
| range and charging options.
| notatoad wrote:
| yes, but this is not the bicycle equivalent of a sports car.
| to put this bike in car terms, it's like if somebody tried to
| market a "Michael Shumacher signature edition" of the toyota
| corolla, and the only difference from the normal model was to
| swap out the steel body panels for carbon fibre ones.
|
| this isn't a racing bike, it's a boring old commuter made
| with good quality but completely normal components, a few
| fancy materials in visible places and a famous cyclist's name
| attached to it.
| bitcurious wrote:
| It's not uncommon in the biggest urban markets to bring your
| bike indoors overnight. The ability to easily lift the bike and
| carry it upstairs or just pick it up so you don't sully the
| carpet is important.
|
| Low weight isn't just for speed.
| xtqctz wrote:
| Exactly. Carrying at 50lb ebike up a three story walk up is a
| hassle, but 25lbs is relatively easy.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| Using carbon fiber is saving on the order of 1 or 2 lbs
| though, not 25.
| jdeibele wrote:
| I had read a long time ago that a typical 3x9 arrangement has
| fewer "real" gears than 27. One reason is that you're not
| supposed to heavily use the gears that are the most opposed
| because it causes additional chain wear. Another is that some
| of the gears calculate to the same gear/inch.
|
| https://forums.mtbr.com/drivetrain-shifters-derailleurs-cran...
| has a nice summary, including a picture from Sheldon Brown's
| website. https://www.sheldonbrown.com/home.html
|
| Basically, there are 21 or 15 usable gears depending on how you
| want to calculate things. Then add to the equation that this is
| an electric bike and a single ring with 9 cassette gears seems
| reasonable.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| This is really just tired old wisdom handed down from the
| days of wide inflexible chains. Modern 8-speed+ chains can
| cover the whole cassette with ease. Additional wear from the
| dreaded cross chaining is never going to be significant when
| the cogs already have profiled teeth. It's always funny to
| read the hand wringing from MTB riders about this when they
| don't even bat an eye at the horrible inefficiencies of 20psi
| fat tires.
| Scarbutt wrote:
| What does "Assistance up to 20 mph" mean?
| cranekam wrote:
| Most e-bikes are "assisted" rather than having a motorcycle-
| style twist throttle. You pedal and the motor contributes some
| additional power until you reach a certain speed (typically
| 20mph in the US, 25kph in Europe). At this point the motor
| stops assisting and the rider is contributing 100% of the
| effort. If you stop pedalling the motor stops assisting,
| regardless of your speed.
|
| In other words the motor will help you accelerate to 20mph but
| beyond that it's just your legs pushing a heavy bike.
| masklinn wrote:
| > beyond that it's just your legs pushing a heavy bike.
|
| Much of this bike's point is that it's a lighweight e though,
| at only 26lbs.
| phonebucket wrote:
| This looks like a nifty bit of kit, but even if I could afford
| it, I probably wouldn't buy it.
|
| Personally, I'm happy to add weight in the form of a steel frame
| in order to gain longevity and comfort.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| A remark from a web developer on the implementation of this site:
|
| On my laptop, scrolling by touch, when I reach the image
| immediately above the colours section, I can't easily go any
| further, because the carousel thingy that takes up most of the
| screen has schnaffled touch actions, and is only translating them
| into horizontal scrolling of that component, even if my finger is
| moving perfectly vertically. This is a bad implementation,
| because it's reimplementing something the browser already offers,
| badly. This is a form of scrolljacking, which is _always_ bad on
| content sites (I have encountered no exceptions; in apps, there
| are a very small list of justifiable cases, e.g. maps to turn it
| into zooming, though it still won't work perfectly no matter what
| you do, because the web just doesn't expose the right
| primitives). What it should do instead is to make the carousel
| thing just a normal scrollable container (though still visually
| hiding the scrollbar), and leave the whole scrolling thing to the
| browser, with the assistance of CSS snap points if available, or
| some gentle touchend and similar watching to simulate its effect
| if it's not.
|
| (Also, clicking on the names of the colours below the carousel is
| badly broken, doing nothing half the time, and taking you to the
| wrong slide half of the rest of the time, to say nothing of them
| having an overly small hit target--the whole row of "Blanc /
| matte finish; black decals" should be the hit target.)
| scoopdewoop wrote:
| FWIW, lots of web devs here. Thats why this is in the
| guidelines:
|
| Please don't complain about website formatting, back-button
| breakage, and similar annoyances. They're too common to be
| interesting. Exception: when the author is present. Then
| friendly feedback might be helpful.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| Thank you for pulling me up on that--I've certainly
| complained about things I find particularly annoying before,
| but I do try to make such complaints valuable by explaining
| the technical side of things (why the problem occurred, and
| why it matters) and a solution, which I know other developers
| find helpful sometimes. Done in moderation, I reckon that
| normally satisfies that guideline (because it's not just a
| complaint, but turns it into a teaching opportunity).
|
| Also, judging by the poster's username, the author is
| probably present.
| S_A_P wrote:
| I'm sure if I have to ask I can't afford it but what is the
| sticker price on the base model? I browsed the prolog spec sheet
| but maybe I missed it?
| hashworks wrote:
| For anyone else ignoring the cookie popup, $4500.
| S_A_P wrote:
| Sorry it was covered by the cookie handling pop up.
| underseacables wrote:
| LeMond is way behind here, and it seems like another last gasp
| for the spotlight before he's resigned to history.
| akulkarni wrote:
| `xx points by gjlemond`
|
| Did... did Greg LeMond post this?
| simcop2387 wrote:
| maybe, it's a rather old account that's never been used before
| as near as i can tell
| cududa wrote:
| Probably his son Geoff.
| gjlemond wrote:
| Truth Cullen ;-)
| [deleted]
| globular-toast wrote:
| ~12kg for anyone wondering. Minimum bicycle weight in the Tour de
| France is 6.8kg (~15lb). It's possible to make bicycles
| significantly lighter than this, but most manufacturers don't
| because of the rules of the Tour.
|
| I do recommend to anyone who hasn't done it yet to take a moment
| and marvel at the technological accomplishment that is the
| bicycle. The car takes far too much credit but ultimately it can
| only work by burning fossil fuels. The bicycle, on the other
| hand, is a machine weighing less than 7kg, that is up to 99%
| efficient and enabled a human to travel 5x faster than walking
| with no extra energy required.
|
| Adding an electric motor to a bicycle removes much of the
| elegance for me. But still better than cars when it comes to
| moving sacks of meat around, of course.
| jlrubin wrote:
| Minimum bike weights serve 2 important roles other than "it's
| just the rules":
|
| 1) Fairness: While differences between bike manufacturers are
| large, the competition is about primarily athletics & setting
| standards allows less well resourced rider teams to compete. 2)
| Safety: Lighter bikes may compromise on strength/safety. Tours
| are already dangerous enough as is, a bike breaking poses a
| danger to all riders on the course not just the rider. Weight
| minimums ensure that there's not an attempt to drop the
| structural weight below safe limits.
|
| That said, weights can be decreased over time if there are
| legitimately new weight saving technologies that do not
| compromise strength of the bike.
| masklinn wrote:
| > 1) Fairness: While differences between bike manufacturers
| are large, the competition is about primarily athletics &
| setting standards allows less well resourced rider teams to
| compete.
|
| FWIW that's one of the reasons why F1s have a minimum weight
| (also allow for a wider ranges of driver physiques).
| globular-toast wrote:
| Yes. I didn't wish to get into the politics of the Tour de
| France but merely give readers a perspective on conventional
| bicycle weights.
| tonylemesmer wrote:
| Love that Greg Lemond has been lurking on here for 8 years for
| this moment ;)
|
| Edit: Ah ok Geoff not Greg.
| someonehere wrote:
| I'm going to date how old I am. I remember when LeMond was the
| spokesperson for Taco Bell at the height of his career. It's
| weird hearing his name again and that memory being triggered in
| me.
| SigmundA wrote:
| I get wanting light weight, my current aluminum ebike is 80 lbs,
| but my current ebike is a Juiced Ripcurrent S fat tire with 1kWh
| battery and I completely out speed and out range my friend who
| has a Turbo Vado SL while being much more comfortable and
| spending 1k less. The main downside with the weight is getting up
| on a bike rack to drive it somewhere, but they have rack with
| ramps now designed for heavy ebikes.
|
| I know for sure my next bike will have full suspension, coming
| from mountain bikes then going back to just a hard tail was
| rough, even when just riding on pavement. Added a really good
| suspension seat post but still not like a full suspension.
|
| I am looking closely at Watt Wagons new Hydra carbon full
| suspension at 58lbs. They are doing some good stuff with the
| Bafang mid drive and upgraded controller.
|
| https://www.juicedbikes.com/products/ripcurrent-s
|
| https://wattwagons.com/collections/hydra
| mrep wrote:
| Is it really that bad on pavement as I am thinking about
| getting the ripcurrent s for commuting next year once wfh ends?
| That hydra does look pretty sweet though but I'm not sure if it
| is worth an extra 2k.
| SigmundA wrote:
| Its ok much better with a Kinekt 2.1 seat post, but after you
| get used to how plush a full suspension bike is its hard to
| go back.
|
| Its not just ride comfort but control too, the rear
| suspension helps keep the rear tire in contact with the road
| instead of bouncing around with the whole bike. Also why a
| mid drive is somewhat better with full suspension due to less
| unsprung weight.
|
| The Juiced RCS is a lot of bang for the buck, the battery is
| huge and mine will top out at 32mph on flat ground and go 40+
| miles on charge without holding back. I have 1300 miles on
| mine with no issues.
|
| Also look at Biktrix.
| andrewem wrote:
| I saw someone riding a cargo ebike with a kid on it and went
| home excited to get one. Then I discovered it weighs over 70
| pounds, which I can't imagine working since to get it to my
| basement storage area requires carrying up several steps then
| down several more through the cramped bulkhead door. Maybe some
| people are strong enough for that not to be a significant
| annoyance, but I'm not one of them.
| masklinn wrote:
| > I saw someone riding a cargo ebike with a kid on it and
| went home excited to get one. Then I discovered it weighs
| over 70 pounds
|
| I mean... I wouldn't expect even a normal cargo to be
| lightweight, an ebike would only add to that.
|
| 70lbs is on the low side for cargo bikes, to say nothing of
| cargo ebikes.
| SigmundA wrote:
| If you live somewhere that needs steps to get to definitely
| an issue. Bikes with throttles can be used to assist in
| moving, some have a "walk mode" where you hit a button and
| its like a 5 mph throttle, mine has both, you could use up
| steps if it made sense.
|
| I just have it in a garage and take off and ride whenever no
| steps, so day to day it's effortless. If I want to take it
| long distance I put it on my bike rack which is a real pain
| due to having to lift up on, looking at tray racks with ramps
| going forward.
| dayofthedaleks wrote:
| Shame it only does pedal assist up to 20mph. I consider
| 28mph/Class III to be essential if one is riding around
| potentially hostile motorists.
|
| This is a decent-ish price for a rear hub motor plus exotic frame
| but my dream verson of this would have a mid drive motor by the
| pedal crank, a belt in place of chain, and an internally geared
| rear hub.
| KerrickStaley wrote:
| For what it's worth, the Taiwanese company Gogoro already has an
| e-bike on the market that ships to the USA (the Eeyo 1s) that has
| the same weight, same range, and same motor wattage at the same
| price point. The design is a little more stylish too in my
| opinion, although it lacks fenders (which the Prolog has). [1]
| [2]
|
| Personally, I've looked at the Eeyo bike but can't really justify
| the price, given that you can buy a very nice full carbon non-
| electric bike from Bikes Direct for less than half the price.
| Even Gogoro's core product, an electric scooter, which is much
| faster, powerful, and more versatile, retails for less.
|
| [1] https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/28/21344679/gogoro-
| eeyo-1s-e... [2] https://eeyo.bike/us/
| carapace wrote:
| Reminds me of Amory Lovins' "Hypercar":
|
| > The Hypercar is a design concept car developed by energy
| analyst Amory Lovins at the Rocky Mountain Institute. This
| vehicle would have ultra-light construction with an aerodynamic
| body using advanced composite materials, low-drag design, and
| hybrid drive. Designers of the Hypercar claim that it would
| achieve a three- to five-fold improvement in fuel economy, equal
| or better performance, safety, amenity, and[clarification
| needed], ( _sic_ ) compared with today's cars.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypercar_(concept_car)
| yalogin wrote:
| Who is this for? Seems to serve a really really niche user base.
|
| If someone wants a electric drive in a bike, it's not for
| exercise, they want it for commute. It starts at around 5k,
| wouldn't they rather go for a scooter/Vespa at that price? They
| are more practical for chores.
|
| The only reason to want a bike is to carry into the apartment if
| they don't want to be bothered with parking. So a super niche
| crowd?
| jeffbee wrote:
| You cannot put a Vespa on the bike rack of a bus. You cannot
| carry a Vespa on a train. You cannot check a Vespa as luggage
| at the airport. An e-bike is categorically different than a
| scooter.
| NovemberWhiskey wrote:
| In the US, I don't think it'd actually be legal to travel on
| an airline with a battery the size of the one in this bike -
| it appears to be a 250 Wh unit, and I understand the legal
| limit for lithium ion batteries is 160 Wh.
| masklinn wrote:
| > I understand the legal limit for lithium ion batteries is
| 160 Wh.
|
| For two batteries, with airline approval. According to the
| TSA, this can alternatively be a single battery up to
| 300Wh, again with airline approval.
| madeofpalk wrote:
| I honestly don't think it's _that_ expensive, comparitively.
| Electric bikes are around PS2000-PS3000 (though both the new
| Vanmoof and Cowboy are right at PS2000), so this seems to be
| just priced a bit more premium for a presumably lighter and
| more premium bike.
|
| Sadly it lacks things like the insurace/bike theft protection
| that others have, which is a huge deal breaker.
|
| I do like the look of this bike, and if i was a bit more richer
| i would definitely one. Looks nicer than my Vanmoof.
|
| > wouldn't they rather go for a scooter/Vespa at that price
|
| They're different things. You can ride a bike in places where
| you can't ride a Vespa.
| sorenbs wrote:
| I tried both the previous gen and newest version of Vanmoof
| and Cowboy. I do not like the automatic gear shifting in
| Vanmoof one bit. The Cowboy is single-speed gear and the
| motor intelligently adjust the level of support so you don't
| feel the lack of gears. This gives a super smooth experience,
| and I honestly expect all electric bikes to transition to
| this setup over time.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-11-27 23:01 UTC)