Jump to content

Mono

Top Members
  • Content Count

    4,209
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Mono last won the day on November 19 2019

Mono had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,137 Excellent

About Mono

  • Rank
    Veteran Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Western Europe
  • EUC
    InMotion V8F, V8, retired: Gotway MCM2s, IPS 132

Recent Profile Visitors

4,344 profile views
  1. It seems quite safe to assume that EUCs that go faster than 25km/h will not be legal any time soon in The Netherlands. I recently saw a post of a Sherman confiscated in Belgium, where EUCs are legal up to 20km/h or 25km/h (not sure which).
  2. I'd also carefully check for cracks. Even the V10F pedals are, unfortunately, not unbreakable.
  3. The additional patches that come with the V8 are, to my understanding, ankle paddings. I find them very useful, because I maintain contact to the shell with the ankles (and the heels). I also don't see anything wrong with filling the space between the upper pads and the legs with additional padding material if necessary to maintain light contact there. Finally, bending the knees is the most important safety reflex. You really, really want to get used to ride with soft and, to various degrees, bent knees.
  4. It is usually considered that "structural integrity damage" can not be excluded by visual inspection. I don't know if it is true, but it is at least convenient for helmet manufacturers. What was your way of determination?
  5. OK, then here is three different data points: I have "heavily" used three battery packs, for about 270, 170 and 120 full cycles, respectively (computed based on a 15Wh/km consumption). Two of them I rarely charged to 100% and both seem to be fine even the one with 270 cycles. The pack I charged to 100% more often seemed to show more deterioration, but I can't say for sure and don't have access to it anymore. A possibly relevant observation: roughly half of my chargers deliver voltages that are significantly below the designated voltage (like 82V instead of 84V). If someone happens to use
  6. Unfortunately, one of the more common severe injuries is somewhere between hard and impossible to protect against by protective gear: a fracture of the humerus. I have seen numerous of them here and elsewhere. That is, risks are unfortunately not a "rhetoric", but they should be part of the decision making when choosing between 21mph and 27mph. As it may not be common knowledge, I just want to point out that the risk increases in some way faster than the speed, so that the OP can make their own fully informed choice.
  7. One consequence from adding 29% speed (27/21 ≈ 1 + 0.29) is adding 65% kinetic energy ((27/21)^2 ≈ 1 + 0.65), that is, the energy potentially absorbed by one of your bones.
  8. Thanks for sharing, I wasn't aware of these package failures. How did you determine that these failures would have been (likely) prevented by balancing the cells every charge? I assume we agree that packages can fail even when they are brought to 100% and balanced during each recharge and the underlying reason for the failure is not likely to be related to balancing?
  9. It seemed to have been common wisdom in this forum (maybe up until a few months ago) that we can balance the cells only every 5th-or-so cycle without doing any harm. What is the evidence that lead to a change of this common wisdom?
  10. Wenn man der Versicherung keine Information verschweigt, dann kann es auch kein Betrug sein. Tathandlung bei Betrug ist das "Täuschen über Tatsachen".
  11. I am closing in on 20,000km of happy wheeling and just bought a V8F. It was a pretty easy choice for what I want and need (in the > 14" and < 18kg segment still isn't that much competition out there). There is no real point to get a race bike if you actually want to use it like a city bike, or a Ferrari if... I have been staying strictly below 25km/h for a long time now, because, to me, the quickly increasing risk with increasing speed isn't worth it. This has the additional benefit to abide by the law here. Yet I still also regularly crawl on sidewalks, which is here against the l
  12. Agreed, the bullying I was referring to took place before the ban. Removing the one who was bullied was the solution (just not the type of solution I am generally interested in), AFAICS. But now thinking about it, in this scenario also the ban should be considered somewhat as part of the bullying. "If the victim would not have been there, no harm would have been done. Then, whos fault is it?" Nice try. Aneta is not the reason for my lost interest whereas, in part, your reaction is. You could possibly change the outcome by some relatively simple measure you chose not to take, namel
  13. Because I do. I do care if people are bullied. I prefer not to be part of a group that bullies outsiders due to a badly chosen profile picture, even when I got assured that I (and everybody else but that very person) will never become a victim. Funny that you mention it though If "trust us" and "forget about it" is the final "professional" answer (to the question I asked above in bold), I have lost interest in contributing to this forum any longer. Cheers either way!
  14. I cannot remember any off topic post of Aneta. I just checked the last nine posts on different topics, nothing off topic. I can clearly remember a post which points out how remarkable it is that she never even responded to the mocking and ridiculing of her profile picture by others. Would you mind to point to a couple of posts which highlight the reason for the ban? That should be easy after months of deliberations. I certainly found her (on topic) arguments on the "How many of us are there" complete unconvincing and non-sense, but that can hardly be a reason for a ban.
×
×
  • Create New...