Justify buying a Gotway Monster v3?

[Aneta]

9 minutes ago, houseofjob said:

Is there any production non-motorcycle PEV using such motors? (and if so, please list)

I'm not sure you can lump all EUC manufacturers under the same boat, as Gotway performance-wise is clearly a notch above the rest, as evidenced by the increased magnet width of 35mm in the 14" MCM5, per ecodrift's teardown report:

I don't know of any, these powerful QS motors are popular in powerful DIY e-bikes (refer to Endless Sphere).

Yes, there are different motors in segwheels, including 35mm one, but they are not made or even designed by segwheel manufacturers, they are all just e-bike motors, with small customizations like no threads on the axle on most wheels (e-bike axles typically have 14mm threads for mounting in standard 10mm dropouts).

Edited December 5, 2019 by Aneta

[houseofjob]

1 minute ago, Aneta said:

I don't know of any, these powerful QS motors are popular in powerful DIY e-bikes (refer to Endless Sphere).

There must be a bigger reason than cost then that zero manufacturers (not DIY) don't use these motors.

 

1 minute ago, Aneta said:

Yes, there are different motors in segwheels, including 35mm one, but they are not made or even designed by segwheel manufacturers, they are all just e-bike motors, with small customizations like no threads on the axle on most wheels (e-bike axles typically have 14mm threads to fit standard 10mm dropouts).

Yes, we all know they are 3rd party e-bike motors customized to spec, as developing a motor from the ground up is financially not possible for mom & pop, niche market EUC makers not named XiaoMi-backed Ninebot/Segway.

[Aneta]

4 hours ago, houseofjob said:

Yes, we all know they are 3rd party e-bike motors customized to spec

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I've got an impression from lurking in the forums that most segwheelers think that KS motors are KS motors, and GW motors are GW motors, etc. Nothing prevents GW from ordering the same 2200W motor from factory as the one used in 16X, and using it in Nicola, but I guess they try to avoid having similarities with other brands.

Edited December 6, 2019 by Aneta

[mrelwood]

7 hours ago, houseofjob said:

I was referring to the guys who stand-squeeze the wheel body (often using pads), which I am not a proponent for due to the compromise in stability, reactivity from unexpected bumps.

If you refer to ”power pads”, the whole point of them is that you don’t have to squeeze the wheel as much to have stability during fast accelerations or steep inclines. During which your CoG is near the front edge of the pedals, wether you are swaying/pedaling/carving/alternating (or even using the pads) or not. That’s really all the pads even can do.

Anyway, my point was that no matter how much one squeezes the wheel or actively uses other muscles, none of that muscle power translates to accelerating the EUC. I’ve yet to see/hear/read/feel/understand the amazing increase in acceleration from the alternating technique, and saying it uses gravity instead of muscle power of regular acceleration, doesn’t fly either.

[houseofjob]

6 minutes ago, mrelwood said:

If you refer to ”power pads”, the whole point of them is that you don’t have to squeeze the wheel as much to have stability during fast accelerations or steep inclines. During which your CoG is near the front edge of the pedals, wether you are swaying/pedaling/carving/alternating (or even using the pads) or not. That’s really all the pads even can do.

Anyway, my point was that no matter how much one squeezes the wheel or actively uses other muscles, none of that muscle power translates to accelerating the EUC. 

Hey, again, it's just based on what I've heard other guys do, not what I do or subscribe to.

 

6 minutes ago, mrelwood said:

I’ve yet to see/hear/read/feel/understand the amazing increase in acceleration from the alternating technique, and saying it uses gravity instead of muscle power of regular acceleration, doesn’t fly either.

It's what I do, @Tishawn Fahie does (in slight variation), along with a couple other riders I've shown now.

🤷‍♂️Feel free to naysay all you want, doesn't really matter, we'll keep riding this way. Until I can get my video out, my written comments on here are really to give pointers to the more open-minded and interested riders.

[Darrell Wesh]

4 hours ago, houseofjob said:

Until I can get my video out, my written comments on here are really to give pointers to the more open-minded and interested riders.

Come on @houseofjob we’re all waiting for the vid! 
Meanwhile, I’m in the process of voicing over/editing my own video.

Kick Start Intro

Edited December 6, 2019 by Darrell Wesh

[mrelwood]

 

4 hours ago, houseofjob said:

🤷‍♂️Feel free to naysay all you want, doesn't really matter, we'll keep riding this way. Until I can get my video out, my written comments on here are really to give pointers to the more open-minded and interested riders.

Absolutely. I’m more of an agnostic than atheist on the matter. I’d really love to find out why the technique works or why it feels to be working! I’ve done my best to understand and practice it. But so far the descriptions about the technique have been too vague for me to grasp, and the physics on why it works have been plain incorrect. That’s why I keep responding, I have an issue with faulty physics as an explanation. But there is clearly interest towards the technique, and I can’t wait to see your video and hopefully understand a lot better either way.

[houseofjob]

4 hours ago, mrelwood said:

Absolutely. I’m more of an agnostic than atheist on the matter. I’d really love to find out why the technique works or why it feels to be working! I’ve done my best to understand and practice it. But so far the descriptions about the technique have been too vague for me to grasp, and the physics on why it works have been plain incorrect. That’s why I keep responding, I have an issue with faulty physics as an explanation. But there is clearly interest towards the technique, and I can’t wait to see your video and hopefully understand a lot better either way.

A big part of this is admittedly my fault!

Upon teaching my first "student" friend rider while shooting footage, I realized I myself did not fully understand exactly what I was doing and why it worked, as I was explaining everything wrong and he did not get it at first (hence, my earliest posts about this on these forums are probably wrong). Like many things, just because I know how to do it, doesn't mean I understood it enough to teach it; I'm hoping I understand better now, as my friend was eventually able to get it.

Your skepticism is actually helpful, as this is partly why I'm taking my time making this video: I want to make sure my logic and demonstration is as bulletproof as I can get it.

 

4 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

Come on @houseofjob we’re all waiting for the vid! 
Meanwhile, I’m in the process of voicing over/editing my own video.

Kick Start Intro

Dope, looking forward to seeing it and giving it a try!

Edited December 6, 2019 by houseofjob

[Hsiang]

On 12/6/2019 at 6:40 AM, houseofjob said:

A big part of this is admittedly my fault!

Upon teaching my first "student" friend rider while shooting footage, I realized I myself did not fully understand exactly what I was doing and why it worked, as I was explaining everything wrong and he did not get it at first (hence, my earliest posts about this on these forums are probably wrong). Like many things, just because I know how to do it, doesn't mean I understood it enough to teach it; I'm hoping I understand better now, as my friend was eventually able to get it.

Your skepticism is actually helpful, as this is partly why I'm taking my time making this video: I want to make sure my logic and demonstration is as bulletproof as I can get it.

 

Dope, looking forward to seeing it and giving it a try!

I think you, Tishawn and my slow mo camera should go on a riding date! =D

I also have been trying DavidY's (local rider) skiing technique; no side to side movement at all and he throw both arm and his body directly forward and it also works quite well. But I am starting to think that at some point we are cheating by using our muscle to help the monster accelerate, rather than simply inputting a command. 

I am also somewhat fuzzy on this, my previous theory had been that by carving hard to the out side we are changing what the gyro consider to be horizontal and then achieving a steeper lean angle by pressing against this tilted plane. But DavidY's technique now makes me question this theory.

[Darrell Wesh]

1 hour ago, Hsiang said:

I also have been trying DavidY's (local rider) skiing technique; no side to side movement at all and he throw both arm and his body directly forward and it also works quite well

So.... he’s doing the Superman? 🤦🏾‍♂️
There are other considerations to take into account for accelerating other than what gets you there the fastest.... like safety. It just so happens that leaning from a sideways posture not only allows you to put more of your mass forward by allowing you to not lose your balance as easily (compared to leaning straight forward) but it also puts you in a position to not face plant. 
 

BTW, putting your arms straight behind you on forward lean would allow you to accelerate faster than putting them straight in front of you. Using arms behind you let’s you use them as a counterbalance so you can lean forward more without falling off which puts more mass in front to accelerate the wheel then what your arms could ever contribute being in front of the wheel.

Edited December 7, 2019 by Darrell Wesh

[Ben Kim]

36 minutes ago, Darrell Wesh said:

So.... he’s doing the Superman? 🤦🏾‍♂️
There are other considerations to take into account for accelerating other than what gets you there the fastest.... like safety. It just so happens that leaning from a sideways posture not only allows you to put more of your mass forward by allowing you to not lose your balance as easily (compared to leaning straight forward) but it also puts you in a position to not face plant. 
 

BTW, putting your arms straight behind you on forward lean would allow you to accelerate faster than putting them straight in front of you. Using arms behind you let’s you use them as a counterbalance so you can lean forward more without falling off which puts more mass in front to accelerate the wheel then what your arms could ever contribute being in front of the wheel.

he definitely does not do the Superman. What he does (along with me) is shift our center of gravity toward the front to tilt the wheel.  It comes from bending our knees. 

I do not use the weight drop method houseofjob uses on sketchy roads because i’m overly concerned of clipping the sidewall on some raised bump and going face first into pavement if i’m unlucky. 

I also use powerpads (on the Monster) for additional leverage when i’m shifted forward as it alleviates some of the effort required. this completely goes against how @houseofjob approaches it, but it certainly works for me   

Its a variation of techniques as road conditions allow. Only in NYC.

[Darrell Wesh]

9 minutes ago, Ben Kim said:

definitely does not do the Superman. What he does (along with me) is shift our center of gravity toward the front to tilt the wheel.  It comes from bending our knees.

Where does the “throwing the arms forward” part come in to the picture then? The Superman is literally when you throw your arms forward, doesn’t matter if you’re bending your knees or keeping them straight. 
The Michael Jackson is when you lean with straight legs. 

[Ben Kim]

Just now, Darrell Wesh said:

Where does the “throwing the arms forward” part come in to the picture then? The Superman is literally when you throw your arms forward, doesn’t matter if you’re bending your knees or keeping them straight. 
The Michael Jackson is when you lean with straight legs. 

throwing your arms also passively shifts your weight forward. I personally find it unnecessary other than to stay loose in the cold. 

[Hsiang]

52 minutes ago, Darrell Wesh said:

So.... he’s doing the Superman? 🤦🏾‍♂️
There are other considerations to take into account for accelerating other than what gets you there the fastest.... like safety. It just so happens that leaning from a sideways posture not only allows you to put more of your mass forward by allowing you to not lose your balance as easily (compared to leaning straight forward) but it also puts you in a position to not face plant. 

No, what I meant was that he swing his arm and center of gravity forward as you would with your leg on a swing. He remain over the wheel so no superman but this "bumps" the wheel forward. Alright, sorry for the self plug, but if you skip to 2:24 in this video you'd see him do it.

 

[houseofjob]

2 hours ago, Hsiang said:

I think you, Tishawn and my slow mo camera should go on a riding date! =D

You have one of those $100K+ slow motion cameras that do 1Mfps? 

 

2 hours ago, Hsiang said:

But I am starting to think that at some point we are cheating by using our muscle to help the monster accelerate, rather than simply inputting a command. 

Speak for yourself. My motion is relatively no muscle at all, just body weight heel plant, body angle leverage, then let the wheel body fall and let gravity do its thing, rinse repeat.

 

2 hours ago, Hsiang said:

I am also somewhat fuzzy on this, my previous theory had been that by carving hard to the out side we are changing what the gyro consider to be horizontal and then achieving a steeper lean angle by pressing against this tilted plane. But DavidY's technique now makes me question this theory.

There are 360 degrees in a circular plane, not only front-back, left-right.

By aiming for a mix of both (like 45 degree angles), you get the best of both: the forward vector force lean of front-back to engage the gyro, combined with the weight gravity of left-right so you don't have to muscle it or similar.

Edited December 8, 2019 by houseofjob

[Aneta]

54 minutes ago, houseofjob said:

There are 360 degrees in a circular plane, not only front-back, left-right.

By aiming for a mix of both (like 45 degree angles), you get the best of both: the forward vector force lean of front-back to engage the gyro, combined with the weight gravity of left-right so you don't have to muscle it or similar.

This totally makes sense, and something I'll definitely try on my GT16, although I need to enlarge the pedals, they're too small for 45 degree offset.

I wonder if anyone have had this crazy thought of making full 360 degree "deck" around the wheel and thus kinda blend segwheel and onewheel concepts? For a quick DIY, one could probably even take a toilet seat and put it over the wheel and screw it onto the pedals. You can then do not only 45 degree stance, but 90 degree, like on snowboard and onewheel. Of course, ground clearance on aggressive ac/de-celerations might be in issue; but pedals on Monster could be lifted quite a lot. Just throwing some crazy ideas. Again.

Edited December 8, 2019 by Aneta

[Arbolest]

2 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

BTW, putting your arms straight behind you on forward lean would allow you to accelerate faster than putting them straight in front of you. Using arms behind you let’s you use them as a counterbalance so you can lean forward more without falling off which puts more mass in front to accelerate the wheel then what your arms could ever contribute being in front of the wheel.

Hahaha, I don't think this is right at all. You're not putting more mass in front of the wheel when you pull your arms back. By pulling your arms back, you put more mass BEHIND you, which does mean that you have to lean farther forward in order to maintain equilibrium/balance, but doesn't really change where your center of mass is because like you said, it's just a counterbalance.

 

Please excuse the bad MS-Paint skills here, but after looking at this picture, you tell me which method "puts more mass in front of the wheel".

This is, of course, taken with the assumption that you're not changing the amount that you're leaning forward. If you change your lean angle then the comparison goes out the window...

[Aneta]

6 minutes ago, Arbolest said:

Hahaha, I don't think this is right at all. You're not putting more mass in front of the wheel when you pull your arms back. By pulling your arms back, you put more mass BEHIND you, which does mean that you have to lean farther forward in order to maintain equilibrium/balance, but doesn't really change where your center of mass is because like you said, it's just a counterbalance.

 

Please excuse the bad MS-Paint skills here, but after looking at this picture, you tell me which method "puts more mass in front of the wheel".

This is, of course, taken with the assumption that you're not changing the amount that you're leaning forward. If you change your lean angle then the comparison goes out the window...

I wonder if the first position (arms forward) makes it harder (slower) to transition into quick deceleration mode? While the second (arms backward) allows you to quickly swing arms forward, which will swing the body back a bit and start the transition into hard lean back?

I wonder also if as pictured (wheel is exactly vertical) there will be no acceleration and the rider will simply fall forward? Because the wheel doesn't know about center of gravity; it only knows its own orientation relative to vertical. Theoretically, it should be possible to start falling forward while keeping the pedals exactly horizontal - the wheel won't move then and you'll simply fall. But it's just hard to execute because it goes so against our instincts.

[Darrell Wesh]

3 hours ago, Arbolest said:

This is, of course, taken with the assumption that you're not changing the amount that you're leaning forward. If you change your lean angle then the comparison goes out the window...

.... Um if you read my post I said exactly that. Don’t take the word counterbalance so literally, i’m not saying it’s an equal amount of weight being thrown forward vs backward. 
 

You allow yourself to lean forward more by reaching your arms behind you on accelerating. 
 

It sounds like you’ve never actually tried this concept because you’d quickly realize what I mean.
By putting your arms straight out in front of you while already leaning, your center of gravity is shifted higher, throwing you off balance unless you actually move your body weight back some. In contrast, by putting them high up behind you, you can compensate for the center of gravity being placed higher by leaning forward more thus accelerating harder. 

[Darrell Wesh]

4 hours ago, Aneta said:

I wonder if the first position (arms forward) makes it harder (slower) to transition into quick deceleration mode? While the second (arms backward) allows you to quickly swing arms forward, which will swing the body back a bit and start the transition into hard lean back?

Bingo! Very analytical. You got it. 
 
Not only can you accelerate harder with arms behind you, but in the event of you starting to lose your balance, or the pedals dipping, you can quickly throw your arms forward to throw your body weight back and decelerate/catch yourself. So from a safety point of view it’s also superior. 

In my image below, you can see the bottom photo my arms are back to allow me to hang far forward off the wheel to accelerate hard. My body’s in a hinged position with highly flexed knees and hips for a low center of gravity for maximum balance and stability over bumps. My feet are wide, and there’s no contact with the wheel from my ankles, shins, or knees. Only the soles of my feet on the pedals. My body is also turned sideways a bit, to get more leverage to lean without losing my balance from a straight on forward lean. 

I posted the top photo to showcase the most common acceleration style: a slightly bent knee and straight on body lean. In that posture some people even grip the wheel to allow them to lean further forward without losing balance and falling off the front (very dangerous in case your grip fails).

 

Edited December 8, 2019 by Darrell Wesh

[Arbolest]

 

3 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

You allow yourself to lean forward more by reaching your arms behind you on accelerating. 

     

The amount that you lean forward doesn't really matter when it comes to getting our wheels to accelerate (you could be leaning straight forward parallel to the ground as long as you had something balancing you on the other side of the wheel's axle, but you still wouldn't move an inch). What matters is the leverage you're applying against the wheel's center of rotation and how much you can get the wheel to tilt forward so that it tries to correct that tilt resulting in an acceleration.

If you want to apply more leverage using nothing more than your own body weight (which is how all of us ride and manipulate our wheels, regardless of style or technique, period) then you need to get your center of mass farther out in front of the wheel. Assuming you're already accelerating by leaning forwards normally, then by holding your arms out in front of you you're shifting your center of mass even farther forward and applying more of a tilt to the wheel. This results in the wheel accelerating harder in order to keep itself upright. However, if we instead assume that you pull your arms back behind you, then you are shifting your center of mass farther back and are now applying less of a tilt to the wheel. Even if you try and compensate for this by leaning farther forward so that your center of mass shifts a little bit toward the front, all it is doing is making you feel like you are "putting more mass in front". It does not actually allow you to accelerate faster. 

 

3 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

It sounds like you’ve never actually tried this concept because you’d quickly realize what I mean.

I think this has less to do with me realizing what you mean, and more to do with you realizing what you're saying...

 

3 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

By putting your arms straight out in front of you while already leaning, your center of gravity is shifted higher, throwing you off balance unless you actually move your body weight back some.

Not... entirely sure what you mean here... I mean, there are a couple things to talk about with this statement, but I'm going to focus on just 2 here:

1) Having a higher center of gravity (mass?) does not automatically or necessarily do anything to your balance. Strictly speaking, since we act as a kind of inverse pendulum when riding an EUC, having a higher center of mass actually makes the system more stable in the limited sense that it takes longer for it to fall into an irrecoverable state and therefore gives us more time to react and correct any imbalance. It seems to me that having a lower center of mass is really only better in the case of a system that's more statically stable, like a car or bike...  Now, in no way am I saying this is the primary issue here, but the statement strikes me as a bit odd and out-of-place.

2) How would "moving your body weight back some" help at all in the event that your center of gravity is "shifted higher"?

 

3 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

In contrast, by putting them high up behind you, you can compensate for the center of gravity being placed higher by leaning forward more thus accelerating harder. 

1) How does leaning forward more help to compensate for your center of gravity being higher up?

2) Didn't you just say the opposite in the previous sentence? I'm pretty sure you said you have to "move your body weight back some."

 

 

[Darrell Wesh]

2 hours ago, Arbolest said:

The amount that you lean forward doesn't really matter when it comes to getting our wheels to accelerate (you could be leaning straight forward parallel to the ground as long as you had something balancing you on the other side of the wheel's axle, but you still wouldn't move an inch). What matters is the leverage you're applying against the wheel's center of rotation and how much you can get the wheel to tilt forward so that it tries to correct that tilt resulting in an acceleration.

If you want to apply more leverage using nothing more than your own body weight (which is how all of us ride and manipulate our wheels, regardless of style or technique, period) then you need to get your center of mass farther out in front of the wheel. 

Uhh I’m beginning to think you’re not actually reading my posts. I said this exact thing. And like the last thing I had to quote you on you somehow skim over my details and miss that I’m saying exactly what you’re saying.

13 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

so you can lean forward more without falling off which puts more mass in front to accelerate the wheel

 

[Darrell Wesh]

2 hours ago, Arbolest said:

Having a higher center of gravity (mass?) does not automatically or necessarily do anything to your balance. Strictly speaking, since we act as a kind of inverse pendulum when riding an EUC, having a higher center of mass actually makes the system more stable in the limited sense that it takes longer for it to fall into an irrecoverable state and therefore gives us more time to react and correct any imbalance. It seems to me that having a lower center of mass is really only better in the case of a system that's more statically stable, like a car or bike...  Now, in no way am I saying this is the primary issue here, but the statement strikes me as a bit odd and out-of-place.

LOL. Okay go out there and start accelerating hard with your straight up tall posture, do try and stand really tall so your COGravity is as high as it can be. Won’t take long for any bump or pothole to cause your body to instinctually lower it’s COG to achieve greater balance and stability on top of the EUC... if they don’t knock you off first 😄 What in the world do you think you’re doing when you bend your knees btw? 😄

As for the breakdown numbering of things you’re questioning I won’t even waste my time quoting and explaining because you just aren’t reading my posts. It’s already answered and I can clearly see you paraphrasing it incorrectly showing you didn’t read. 

[Darrell Wesh]

5 hours ago, Arbolest said:

Assuming you're already accelerating by leaning forwards normally, then by holding your arms out in front of you you're shifting your center of mass even farther forward and applying more of a tilt to the wheel. This results in the wheel accelerating harder in order to keep itself upright. However, if we instead assume that you pull your arms back behind you, then you are shifting your center of mass farther back and are now applying less of a tilt to the wheel. Even if you try and compensate for this by leaning farther forward so that your center of mass shifts a little bit toward the front, all it is doing is making you feel like you are "putting more mass in front". It does not actually allow you to accelerate faster. 

Apparently you misunderstand what I’m actually doing. I’m not “already accelerating” and then putting my arms behind me. If I was already accelerating and decide to put my arms in front then yes, I would go faster then if they were behind me. So you’re correct on that front but that’s not what I’m talking about. My arms go behind me on initial acceleration which I mentioned in my very first post about it by saying “arms straight behind you on forward lean” as in the onset of a forward lean. 

If my arms are going behind me then you can bet that I’m accelerating hard. I’m not leaning forward and then straightening my arms behind me and then leaning forward some more. Everything happens simultaneously- and fast. If these movements happen sequentially you don’t get the same net effect. I’m not keeping my arms behind me for a lengthy period of time, just for a second or two as I dive forward. 

Accelerating hard, one doesn’t slowly put mass forward- they throw it forward. Similar to a car, if you want fast acceleration you floor the pedal, not slowly press it down. My arms swing behind me to prevent me from falling off the front if I (rarely) accidentally leaned too far. This motion of me throwing my weight forward happens simultaneously with me throwing my arms backward.

If I were to accelerate hard and throw my arms forward I would likely fall off the wheel from losing my balance not to mention it’s unnatural to simultaneously lean and put your arms forward. You would almost have to do that sequentially (lean, then stick arms forward) instead of simultaneously, losing net time on acceleration. 
 

Acceleration is not just about what can put your center of mass the farthest forward. It’s also about the time it takes you to get in that position of acceleration.  Which is why I espouse my kick start and why throwing your arms back while going forward accelerates you faster. That time it takes you to get in position is more important than the incremental increase you would see from putting your mass a little more forward but taking longer to do so. I’m from a sport where 0.01 seconds or 1 millisecond makes the difference from getting a top 3 medal to being off the podium. You better believe that getting in position faster and being able to do it reliably and safely (without over leaning)makes a huge difference. 

The image of Tishawn is a good example of throwing one’s arm back while simultaneously throwing the weight forward to accelerate. Happens in 0:44 of the video. 

 

Edited December 8, 2019 by Darrell Wesh

[Arbolest]

So your technique is only concerning a short moment or two at the very beginning of an acceleration maneuver, and not an entire ramp-up to full speed?

Fascinating. So it's a transient effect instead of a prolonged one... I do admit that makes much more sense taken in that context, although there are still some finer points that I'm struggling to grasp considering that if I remember correctly you do NOT advocate gripping the side of the wheel with your legs at all?