My MSP Triumphs, Tribulations, and Failures

[xorbe]

Torque is difficult to quantify here because there are at least 2 aspects ... the torque the wheel can ultimately deliver, and how hard the firmware makes you work to experience that torque.  The MCM5 basically throws torque in your face, so accessible.  Balancing is also a 2 party negotiation between you and the wheel ... you lean but you also account for the acceleration actually being dished out.

Edited February 25, 2020 by xorbe

[ZenRyder]

On 2/22/2020 at 11:14 AM, Marty Backe said:

I consider the Nikola a compact version of the MSX and it feels better balanced than the MSX/MSP - the MSX line of wheels has a very high center of gravity (good for trails, etc) but the lower center of gravity of the Nikola provides for a more natural riding experience, IMO.

Now @Marty Backe, with all due respect to one of the most experienced Wheel riders in this world and someone I personally look up to, I gotta call BS. I mean you are qualifying the statement by saying it "feels" better balanced in your "opinion", but seriously?

The Nikola is over 2 inches taller than the MSX/MSP and when I rode an 1840wh Plus version, it felt distinctly top heavy to me. Now it's true that it has a smaller tire so pedal height is probably lower than the tall riding MSX (6.5"). But the fact that it's batteries are higher than the MSX and the Plus even has a battery pack that is on top of the side packs in nose bleed territory. The photo below is from a post you did last July and you can see that Blue battery pack sitting way up there on the left hand Plus photo.

The MSX is 1" wider and feels "squat" and short compared to the Nikola. Anyway, I'm sure there is no shortage of people with an opinion on this matter and while the Nikola's 16" tire is certainly more nimble, I'm at a loss to imagine the MSX feeling top heavy when compared to the Nikola Plus. I think the fact that the battery is higher is compounded by the lower axle height due to the shorter wheel. Thus the pivot of the axle and the distance of the weight above vs below compared to the MSX is what gives it the top heavy feel that I experienced, in my own very humble opinion.  

Edited February 26, 2020 by ZenRyder

[Marty Backe]

1 hour ago, ZenRyder said:

Now @Marty Backe, with all due respect to one of the most experienced Wheel riders in this world and someone I personally look up to, I gotta call BS. I mean you are qualifying the statement by saying it "feels" better balanced in your "opinion", but seriously?

The Nikola is over 2 inches taller than the MSX/MSP and when I rode an 1840wh Plus version, it felt distinctly top heavy to me. Now it's true that it has a smaller tire so pedal height is probably lower than the tall riding MSX (6.5"). But the fact that it's batteries are higher than the MSX and the Plus even has a battery pack that is on top of the side packs in nose bleed territory. The photo below is from a post you did last July and you can see that Blue battery pack sitting way up there on the left hand Plus photo.

The MSX is 1" wider and feels "squat" and short compared to the Nikola. Anyway, I'm sure there is no shortage of people with an opinion on this matter and while the Nikola's 16" tire is certainly more nimble, I'm at a loss to imagine the MSX feeling top heavy when compared to the Nikola Plus. I think the fact that the battery is higher is compounded by the lower axle height due to the shorter wheel. Thus the pivot of the axle and the distance of the weight above vs below compared to the MSX is what gives it the top heavy feel that I experienced, in my own very humble opinion.  

OK, I raise by calling BS on you 

First of all, I've never used the word "top heavy". The center of balance relative to your body is higher on the MSX line of wheels vs the Nikola. That's a fact.

It's not the height of the wheel/shell that make me say this, it's the height of the pedals above the ground. In combination with the pedal hanger height above ground and the large dihedral angle, your feel and therefore body feel higher off the ground and closer to the axle. This can be measured with a tape measure, which I've done (on all my wheels).

I assume you have many miles on the Nikola? It baffles me how anyone can conclude differently. The MSX/MSP/KS16X have a higher stance then the best balanced wheel currently made, the Nikola. I stand by my assessment 

I'd love to hear from other people that own all of these wheels.

And if you continue to disagree with me we're going to settle it by arm wresting this Saturday 

[KiwiRoller]

4 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

OK, I raise by calling BS on you 

First of all, I've never used the word "top heavy". The center of balance relative to your body is higher on the MSX line of wheels vs the Nikola. That's a fact.

It's not the height of the wheel/shell that make me say this, it's the height of the pedals above the ground. In combination with the pedal hanger height above ground and the large dihedral angle, your feel and therefore body feel higher off the ground and closer to the axle. This can be measured with a tape measure, which I've done (on all my wheels).

I assume you have many miles on the Nikola? It baffles me how anyone can conclude differently. The MSX/MSP/KS16X have a higher stance then the best balanced wheel currently made, the Nikola. I stand by my assessment 

I'd love to hear from other people that own all of these wheels.

And if you continue to disagree with me we're going to settle it by arm wresting this Saturday 

I'd never weigh in on tech specs... but in terms of general feel of riding the wheel, based on now several test drives, I literally hated the Nikola.

It's hard for me to describe why, but after a lot of thinking about it, let me give it my best shot - I think there are some wheels that feel like they are an extension of your body, and as you twist and move they feel connected to you, and I think they suit an active riding style with lots of carving, and head and shoulder turns and movement. Wheels that feel like this to me are like the MSX, the KS16x, etc... in general, Gotways feel more this way to me.

Then there are wheels that I feel are more like magic carpets that are carrying you very smoothly. It's a different feeling, and it supports a more static riding style. Like the KS18L / XL, the Gotway Monster, and the Nikola.

It's not that you can't carve on them, or perform active movements on them, because you definitely can. It's more that to me at least, these wheels feel like I am standing on a vehicle - a very comfy vehicle in most cases - rather than the former wheels, which feel like they have actually grown out of my feet and are just an extension of my body.

I don't know if that sounds like BS to everyone else, but to me, after lots of testing, and I really wanted to love the Nikola, it just didn't feel right to me. And now I am stuck deciding between a KS16x and the MSX100v.

 

 

 

 

[Marty Backe]

6 minutes ago, KiwiRoller said:

I'd never weigh in on tech specs... but in terms of general feel of riding the wheel, based on now several test drives, I literally hated the Nikola.

It's hard for me to describe why, but after a lot of thinking about it, let me give it my best shot - I think there are some wheels that feel like they are an extension of your body, and as you twist and move they feel connected to you, and I think they suit an active riding style with lots of carving, and head and shoulder turns and movement. Wheels that feel like this to me are like the MSX, the KS16x, etc... in general, Gotways feel more this way to me.

Then there are wheels that I feel are more like magic carpets that are carrying you very smoothly. It's a different feeling, and it supports a more static riding style. Like the KS18L / XL, the Gotway Monster, and the Nikola.

It's not that you can't carve on them, or perform active movements on them, because you definitely can. It's more that to me at least, these wheels feel like I am standing on a vehicle - a very comfy vehicle in most cases - rather than the former wheels, which feel like they have actually grown out of my feet and are just an extension of my body.

I don't know if that sounds like BS to everyone else, but to me, after lots of testing, and I really wanted to love the Nikola, it just didn't feel right to me. And now I am stuck deciding between a KS16x and the MSX100v.

This is all very subjective to be sure.

To me, the Nikola is more of an extension of the body. We have opposite views (subjective views), which is OK.

I assume you never owned a Nikola and are basing your views on a little riding of one that you borrowed??? From my experience, it can take 100+ miles of riding a wheel to get tuned into it properly. Just a thought.

But there's no doubt that some people really dislike particular wheels. Regarding the Nikola, I'm surrounded by guys riding and loving theirs. This isn't meant to disprove your feelings but more to show that mine aren't an aberration 

[KiwiRoller]

4 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

This is all very subjective to be sure.

To me, the Nikola is more of an extension of the body. We have opposite views (subjective views), which is OK.

I assume you never owned a Nikola and are basing your views on a little riding of one that you borrowed??? From my experience, it can take 100+ miles of riding a wheel to get tuned into it properly. Just a thought.

But there's no doubt that some people really dislike particular wheels. Regarding the Nikola, I'm surrounded by guys riding and loving theirs. This isn't meant to disprove your feelings but more to show that mine aren't an aberration 

I'd never suggest that your feelings are an aberration. I admire your videos very much, and your content is one of the largest contributing factors to me selecting my next wheel. And riding is such an individual thing, because body types are so different, and what we love about it is so different. And everybody has a different experience of riding.

For me, I test-drove the Nikola in Paris for a couple of hours, and I test drove the Nikola again in Wellington for a couple of hours. Based on speed and acceleration, it was the wheel I was hoping to fall in love with, and it felt comfortable. But I never felt settled on it for some reason.

The second I jumped on an MSX, I was in love. And the same for the 16x - which I was expecting to hate, as I had never ridden a Kingsong that I actually liked before and I liked it so much that it is actually now a really tough choice.

 

 

 

 

 

[Marty Backe]

15 minutes ago, KiwiRoller said:

I'd never suggest that your feelings are an aberration. I admire your videos very much, and your content is one of the largest contributing factors to me selecting my next wheel. And riding is such an individual thing, because body types are so different, and what we love about it is so different. And everybody has a different experience of riding.

For me, I test-drove the Nikola in Paris for a couple of hours, and I test drove the Nikola again in Wellington for a couple of hours. Based on speed and acceleration, it was the wheel I was hoping to fall in love with, and it felt comfortable. But I never felt settled on it for some reason.

The second I jumped on an MSX, I was in love. And the same for the 16x - which I was expecting to hate, as I had never ridden a Kingsong that I actually liked before and I liked it so much that it is actually now a really tough choice.

Well, there could be worse wheels than the MSX to fall in love with 

As I've said many times, we are all arguing about the margins. We are surrounded by great wheels. Every wheel that you can buy now would have been considered mind blowing 4-years ago.

[EMA]

8 hours ago, ZenRyder said:

Now @Marty Backe, with all due respect to one of the most experienced Wheel riders in this world and someone I personally look up to, I gotta call BS. I mean you are qualifying the statement by saying it "feels" better balanced in your "opinion", but seriously?

The Nikola is over 2 inches taller than the MSX/MSP and when I rode an 1840wh Plus version, it felt distinctly top heavy to me. Now it's true that it has a smaller tire so pedal height is probably lower than the tall riding MSX (6.5"). But the fact that it's batteries are higher than the MSX and the Plus even has a battery pack that is on top of the side packs in nose bleed territory. The photo below is from a post you did last July and you can see that Blue battery pack sitting way up there on the left hand Plus photo.

The MSX is 1" wider and feels "squat" and short compared to the Nikola. Anyway, I'm sure there is no shortage of people with an opinion on this matter and while the Nikola's 16" tire is certainly more nimble, I'm at a loss to imagine the MSX feeling top heavy when compared to the Nikola Plus. I think the fact that the battery is higher is compounded by the lower axle height due to the shorter wheel. Thus the pivot of the axle and the distance of the weight above vs below compared to the MSX is what gives it the top heavy feel that I experienced, in my own very humble opinion.  

i agree with you 

and most of the time , different feeling on a wheel depends on the tyre

the monster too has a great CG becouse half of the batteries are low in the shell, the best balanced wheel is on the z10 

[Marty Backe]

 

[mrelwood]

11 hours ago, Planemo said:

The wheel is either being overleaned (taken beyond the motor/battery power available) or it isn't. I dont see how firmware makes any difference.

If you get to try or even read on the KingSong 2.0 firmware, you’ll see. The difference is a big one.

11 hours ago, Planemo said:

So how are people clarifying the MSP has more torque

This question troubles me a lot atm as well. If every reviewer would sing the same tune, it would be easy to conclude that there is an aspect that truly affects the feeling of torque, but which aspect it is might just be unknown. On the MSP though, in one review video two persons agreed that if they weren’t concentrating, they wouldn’t notice a difference to a 100V MSX in uphill acceleration. On another I think they said there is a small difference. Now Marty tells us that there is a huge difference. In my understanding it is even the exact same wheel being reviewed.

I don’t know what to think about this at this point. I’m still catching up on Marty’s videos though.

By the way, @Marty Backe, have you measured the exact tire diameter on the MSP? In some sizes at least the CST C-1488 is a bit narrower than others, which would translate to a smaller diameter as well. On a 18x3.0” tire the difference may be even a notable one.

11 hours ago, RagingGrandpa said:

Why? My assertion is more aggressive control software, which at low wheel speeds seems to respond to small rider inputs with larger motor current than previous models.

The KS 2.0 fw managed to make accelerating more effortless, but only by fundamentally revamping the feel of the pedal modes. For GW this is a much tougher game. If the modes would feel assistive at all, long time GW riders like Marty would surely yell blasphemy from the get go. If GW has managed to include an assistive behaviour with such finesse that the reviewers haven’t even noticed, I must say that the person in responsible for their riding mode programming is nothing short of a jesus in his line of work.

7 hours ago, Marty Backe said:

Every wheel that you can buy now would have been considered mind blowing 4-years ago.

In my books most of them still are!

[Mike Sacristan]

12 hours ago, RagingGrandpa said:

"Torque" is a word representing a sensation, not a measurement, to many end-users. Search "zippyness" in the forum, if you're hung up on the whole quantitative-vs-qualitative thing.

Said another way: people are reporting the MSP "feels more grunty." "More eager." "More sporty at low speeds." "Less sluggish." Cool!

Marty is giving real-world feedback that matters- without using lean pads, this is the first 18" wheel he's been able to climb his standard test surface with.

Why? My assertion is more aggressive control software, which at low wheel speeds seems to respond to small rider inputs with larger motor current than previous models. This higher sensitivity seems to let experienced riders like Marty get into a forward-leaning stance more easily, and therefore they can put more CG offset on the wheel and get those higher motor forces they wanted. Previous wheels with less sensitive lowspeed control did keep the pedals flat-ish, but I suspect the MSP is giving a kick current in response to change in rider command. Sounds like they managed to do it without the control feeling 'busy' either. Transients and HMI are a big part of this situation, making the difference between 'stepping off' and 'staying on.'

Well written.
The opposite of this is how I experienced the 16X FW.105 to FW 1.07 transition.
Input is smoothened out in 1.07. The range of movement of the pedals is more limited so there is less "squish" front to back.
The softest mode on FW 1.07 has less range of movement than the hardest mode on FW 1.05. Less aggressive and lower resolution.

The range of movement affects hill climbing the most.
In general riding I never accelerated aggressively enough to notice a difference and I am not much for overleaning wheels at speed.

 

8 hours ago, KiwiRoller said:

For me, I test-drove the Nikola in Paris for a couple of hours, and I test drove the Nikola again in Wellington for a couple of hours. Based on speed and acceleration, it was the wheel I was hoping to fall in love with, and it felt comfortable. But I never felt settled on it for some reason.

The second I jumped on an MSX, I was in love. And the same for the 16x - which I was expecting to hate, as I had never ridden a Kingsong that I actually liked before and I liked it so much that it is actually now a really tough choice.

My wife tried the Nikola last year. Did not like it.
Tried it again a couple of months later. Sort of liked.
Tried it again a month ago in a 2640Wh version. Loved it. A 29kg Nikola... she thought the 1845Wh version was too heavy.
She has a couple of thousand kilometers on the MSX and a maybe one thousand on the 16X.

https://youtu.be/lpxJiMk7P7g?t=1749    <--- Her reaction: displaying as a link instead to not fill this thread with fluff and too much derailment.

---------------

Riding an EUC isn't a math puzzle that we then say is subjective. Our bodies are not pure machines either.
I prefer the riding feel of the 16X. If I am riding a Nikola it just feels like a smaller MSX.
I rode my MSX for 35km two days and I struggled to like it. "A clunky wheel" requiring way too much sacrifice of posture to get to speed. Even worse in 8m/s wind.

I was going to go for a group ride on Sunday with some e-sk8ers and I was torn. Do I take the 16X or the MSX? The MSX is faster. 8 m/s wind though and riding in the city? The 16X... what about the CX tyre though... will I get into trouble on surprise irregularities on the road? I took the 16X. It is faster than the MSX most of the time.

I own a 16X and an MSX. I prefer the one I ride most. And the one I ride most is the one that I prefer. The circle is complete.

If they have tuned the MSPro to be more responsive to our input then this will be the best MSuper ever. And so far it is looking that way.

 

[Cory Brown]

15 hours ago, KiwiRoller said:

I'd never weigh in on tech specs... but in terms of general feel of riding the wheel, based on now several test drives, I literally hated the Nikola.

It's hard for me to describe why, but after a lot of thinking about it, let me give it my best shot - I think there are some wheels that feel like they are an extension of your body, and as you twist and move they feel connected to you, and I think they suit an active riding style with lots of carving, and head and shoulder turns and movement. Wheels that feel like this to me are like the MSX, the KS16x, etc... in general, Gotways feel more this way to me.

Then there are wheels that I feel are more like magic carpets that are carrying you very smoothly. It's a different feeling, and it supports a more static riding style. Like the KS18L / XL, the Gotway Monster, and the Nikola.

It's not that you can't carve on them, or perform active movements on them, because you definitely can. It's more that to me at least, these wheels feel like I am standing on a vehicle - a very comfy vehicle in most cases - rather than the former wheels, which feel like they have actually grown out of my feet and are just an extension of my body.

I don't know if that sounds like BS to everyone else, but to me, after lots of testing, and I really wanted to love the Nikola, it just didn't feel right to me. And now I am stuck deciding between a KS16x and the MSX100v.

 

 

 

 

I definitely know what you mean. I just got my Nikola a couple days ago and it's such a different feel than something like the MCM5 where I feel like I have a robot leg. Can't decide if I like it or not, but it's definitely a different feeling.

I wonder if you would like the Nikola if it had the tire swapped out? I've heard it makes quite the difference. I'm definitely considering doing it on mine at some point, but I want to give this one a bit of time....see if it grows on me.

 

Now if I can just get Chooch to let me try out this MSP...

[Marty Backe]

7 hours ago, mrelwood said:

If you get to try or even read on the KingSong 2.0 firmware, you’ll see. The difference is a big one.

This question troubles me a lot atm as well. If every reviewer would sing the same tune, it would be easy to conclude that there is an aspect that truly affects the feeling of torque, but which aspect it is might just be unknown. On the MSP though, in one review video two persons agreed that if they weren’t concentrating, they wouldn’t notice a difference to a 100V MSX in uphill acceleration. On another I think they said there is a small difference. Now Marty tells us that there is a huge difference. In my understanding it is even the exact same wheel being reviewed.

I don’t know what to think about this at this point. I’m still catching up on Marty’s videos though.

By the way, @Marty Backe, have you measured the exact tire diameter on the MSP? In some sizes at least the CST C-1488 is a bit narrower than others, which would translate to a smaller diameter as well. On a 18x3.0” tire the difference may be even a notable one.

The KS 2.0 fw managed to make accelerating more effortless, but only by fundamentally revamping the feel of the pedal modes. For GW this is a much tougher game. If the modes would feel assistive at all, long time GW riders like Marty would surely yell blasphemy from the get go. If GW has managed to include an assistive behaviour with such finesse that the reviewers haven’t even noticed, I must say that the person in responsible for their riding mode programming is nothing short of a jesus in his line of work.

In my books most of them still are!

I just measured the MSP and MSX tires. They have the identical diameter, width, and profile.

I don't own a 100-volt MSX. When they were first released I was in San Francisco for some group rides, and some of the local guys had gotten them. I was able to ride it for awhile and noted that I couldn't detect a difference at the speeds I rode. I distinctly remember that the owners of said wheels said that they had a hard time detecting if they had more power (torque or whatever you want to call it). More speed for sure, but not power. And these guys ride the steep hills of San Francisco.

My understanding has always been that the 100-volt versions are just faster.

Considering the wider motor of the MSP, do we not expect some objective improvement in power?

[Marty Backe]

20 minutes ago, Cory Brown said:

I definitely know what you mean. I just got my Nikola a couple days ago and it's such a different feel than something like the MCM5 where I feel like I have a robot leg. Can't decide if I like it or not, but it's definitely a different feeling.

I wonder if you would like the Nikola if it had the tire swapped out? I've heard it makes quite the difference. I'm definitely considering doing it on mine at some point, but I want to give this one a bit of time....see if it grows on me.

 

Now if I can just get Chooch to let me try out this MSP...

Wow, I think the Nikola tire is so nice. I can't imagine removing it. But I guess if you don't like the ride of softer tires a swap may be called for. Like everything, peoples preferences are truly varied and individual.

Chooch should have the MSP this weekend.

Edited February 26, 2020 by Marty Backe

[Planemo]

19 hours ago, RagingGrandpa said:

"Torque" is a word representing a sensation, not a measurement, to many end-users.

I understand that many end users simply see it as a sensation, but it is also very much a measurement. And no reason why it cant be quantifiable either.

19 hours ago, RagingGrandpa said:

Search "zippyness" in the forum, if you're hung up on the whole quantitative-vs-qualitative thing.

I read the thread many moons ago.

19 hours ago, RagingGrandpa said:

Why? My assertion is more aggressive control software, which at low wheel speeds seems to respond to small rider inputs with larger motor current than previous models.

I can understand a more aggressive firmware shoving a higher current to the riders demands, but by stating that you are suggesting that the old MSX suffers from 'baby overleans' as one rides it? 

19 hours ago, RagingGrandpa said:

Previous wheels with less sensitive lowspeed control did keep the pedals flat-ish, but I suspect the MSP is giving a kick current in response to change in rider command.

Again, for the above to be correct, it would mean that the MSX suffers from 'squishy pedals' when the rider demands quick, instant changes. IMO it doesnt. Pedals feel really solid to me. Have you ridden an MSX in anger?

I havent ever overleaned my MSX, nor have I felt the pedals being anything other than rock solid. By definition this means I have never reached the max torque available does it not?

Until I find that limit, and crucially, compare the same scenario with an MSP, I  dont see how I could say one faired better than the other.

I think mrelwood understands what I am trying to get at. Dont get me wrong, I am not saying the MSP doesnt have more torque, nor dimissing what the rider feels, I am just questioning how people are clarifying it has more torque when it appears they have never extracted max torque out of their older MSX.

[mrelwood]

1 hour ago, Marty Backe said:

I just measured the MSP and MSX tires. They have the identical diameter, width, and profile.

Bummer. That would’ve explained it all. Thank you for measuring! Knowing your standards, I’m confident you did it to a respectable degree of precision as well.

1 hour ago, Marty Backe said:

I distinctly remember that the owners of said wheels said that they had a hard time detecting if they had more power (torque or whatever you want to call it).

And that’s exactly why some of us are puzzled now as well. Maximum amount of any performance measure on an EUC is unknown until it is surpassed. Be it speed, torque, power, range, etc.

1 hour ago, Marty Backe said:

Considering the wider motor of the MSP, do we not expect some objective improvement in power?

Ability to provide more power, sure. But as Planemo pointed at, if the pedals stay horizontal, more power to keep the pedals horizontal is not required, and isn’t provided.

47 minutes ago, Planemo said:

I understand that many end users simply see it as a sensation, but it is also very much a measurement.

This is something I think we just must accept, that people call the sensation of torque just ”torque”.

47 minutes ago, Planemo said:

it would mean that the MSX suffers from 'squishy pedals'

I agree, the current explanations don’t make sense from a physics standpoint. The aspect of firmware might be bigger than you think though. It is not just a direct conversion of forces, it’s a computer program that can behave differently in different situations. And it’s the only card left on the table, afaics. The KS 2.0 fw really is the best example of this, as in the hard mode the pedals are quite hard, but the fw applies assist at the beginning of accelerating and braking. Almost everyone raves about the vastly improved acceleration, or even ”torque”. And rightfully so, the improvement is not small.

47 minutes ago, Planemo said:

I think mrelwood understands what I am trying to get at.

To a level where I thought I was reading a comment of my own writing. Seriously! Having read the zippyness thread, you probably already knew where I stand.

Feelings are just feelings, and can’t really be argued with. But every feeling has scientific reasons behind it, be it mathphysical, biological, psychological, and what have you.

[Mrd777]

On 2/20/2020 at 11:34 PM, Marty Backe said:

High-speed braking I can't address.

this answers it!

 

[Cory Brown]

2 hours ago, Marty Backe said:

Wow, I think the Nikola tire is so nice. I can't imagine removing it. But I guess if you don't like the ride of softer tires a swap may be called for. Like everything, peoples preferences are truly varied and individual.

Chooch should have the MSP this weekend.

I'm honestly still on the fence. I can't really say that I don't like it. Just that it's different. I definitely plan to give it a few hundred miles before I make any decision. It may grow on me. The gyro effect is just a really weird thing to get used to.  Adjusting my tire pressure may also have a large effect on how I feel about it. We will see.

Definitely looking forward to comparing it to the MSP though. Thanks for all your reports, Marty!

[xorbe]

3 hours ago, Cory Brown said:

something like the MCM5 where I feel like I have a robot leg

Hah, nice description!

[.....]

23 hours ago, Planemo said:

The wheel is either being overleaned (taken beyond the motor/battery power available) or it isn't. I dont see how firmware makes any difference. Unless the FW is that crap that it isn't supplying what the motor/battery are capable of.

So how are people clarifying the MSP has more torque if even the torque on 14" + wheels isn't actually being used?

ALL firmware limits the available power to one degree or another. Its not hard to understand that the raw power available from both the motor and batteries is WAY more than useable from a dead stop.  If the firmware didnt limit the power, it would be near impossible to ride and very dangerous. ELectric motors and batteries are very good at creating massive amounts of torque on demand.  Limiting the torque is what enables us to start smoothly and not immediately fall backwards as the wheel runs away into the sunset. Limiting the power also gives the wheel a way to be predictable. If there were no limits, we couldnt predict it at all, as the limiting factors would change and fluctuate horribly as battery temp and state of charge varies from so many other variables at a moments notice. There would also be issues with all of this because of typical variances in manufacturing. The firmware DOES limit many things in order to protect the equipment, the batteries, and the rider. You want to see why the firmware is limited, why not directly hook that motor up to that battery bank and see just how useable the power is when left unchecked. Asking manufacturers to lift the limits in their firmware, would pose a threat to everyone involved. Last thing the industry needs is, wheels that are unpredictable . Allowing the end user to decide how safety is implemented is also a bad idea. In the end, these manufacturers have a lot on the line and Im pretty sure they dont want to risk further lawsuits or legislation by allowing the ignorant public to endanger themselves more than neccessary. Manufacturers must protect themselves from the consumer. We know how it goes...  Consumer asks for more control and less limits, consumer gets hurt, consumer sues manufacturer for giving them what they asked for.

[Marty Backe]

2 hours ago, Cory Brown said:

I'm honestly still on the fence. I can't really say that I don't like it. Just that it's different. I definitely plan to give it a few hundred miles before I make any decision. It may grow on me. The gyro effect is just a really weird thing to get used to.  Adjusting my tire pressure may also have a large effect on how I feel about it. We will see.

Definitely looking forward to comparing it to the MSP though. Thanks for all your reports, Marty!

The only wheel that has a gyro effect, to me, is the Z10.

Maybe because I ride 11 different wheels (and I do ride them all) I can no longer tell the difference??? The Nikola seems incredibly nimble and smooth with zero "gyro" effect, if I'm understanding the term.

The Z10 is the wheel where you have to lean your body up and over the side of the wheel when turning, and the wheel is kind of standing upright. I get zero sense of that with the Nikola. Maybe it's too subtle for me.

I suppose everyone who complains about the 16X (and now the Nikola) having a gyro effect should ride the Z10 for awhile  

Edited February 26, 2020 by Marty Backe

[Marty Backe]

2 hours ago, Mrd777 said:

this answers it!

 

Yeah, I love the MSP videos that Fantomas has been putting out. This one is particularly good (and that ending cracks me up).

We might be getting him out to the 2020 Los Angeles Games.

[mrelwood]

 

1 hour ago, ShanesPlanet said:

Limiting the torque is what enables us to start smoothly and not immediately fall backwards as the wheel runs away into the sunset.

You are missing a fundamental point of what makes a self-balancing vehicle self-balancing. You might be thinking through a gas pedal analogy. Which works fine, as long as you have the correct zero position, which on an EUC is when the pedals are horizontal. In your example the EUC would still accelerate when the pedals are already back to horizontal, which it does not, wether the power is limited or not.

The main function for the control board is to apply power to the motor until the neutral position of the control board/shell/pedals is restored, I’m sure we all agree on that. The ratio (and slope) of the pedal/shell angle to the amount of output power to be applied is determined by the firmware. This ratio and slope prevent all power from being deployed at the slightest lean.

A power limiter in an EUC is (or would be) a limiter that doesn’t allow more power to be applied, despite the forward tilt being increased further. Reaching such limiter would very likely cause a faceplant.

Food for thought: During the last about six years the power output of the EUCs has been increased roughly 20 fold. If ”torque limiting” was responsible for keeping us upright, when did it come into play? Or were the first ones too powerful as well?

1 hour ago, ShanesPlanet said:

ELectric motors and batteries are very good at creating massive amounts of torque on demand. 

Yes, on demand. Not after. As soon as the neutral position is reached, zero power is used for acceleration. No limiter needed for that.

[.....]

Good insight for sure. I'm still thinking that limiting torque thru firmware is a necessary evil tho. If we would only allow what is physically possible, be the limits, wouldnt it make for an extremely unreliable device? Perhaps the limits could be removed, but then we would be relying on factors that are constantly changing, rather than a predetermined limit we can expect.  I'd imagine that the power curve for takeoff is an entirely different matter that isnt limited by max torque in most cases? When i think of firmware limits, I may be saying it wrong, as obviously it has to limit things, only its not described as limits, but as curve values.   Regardless, somewhat of a thread hijack, my apologies.

[mrelwood]

@ShanesPlanet, I would like to ask for more detailed explanation on what exactly do you mean, as I'm having a bit of a trouble following. Again, this might just be a terminology mismatch, if for example what you call limiting I call controlling.

Quote

If we would only allow what is physically possible, be the limits, wouldnt it make for an extremely unreliable device?

How so?

Quote

Perhaps the limits could be removed, but then we would be relying on factors that are constantly changing, rather than a predetermined limit we can expect.

I suppose you again refer to battery voltage and state of charge as the factors. Yes, they are constantly changing, and yes, we rely on them to produce the power. The state of charge goes down, so does the maximum power the wheel can produce at that time. I don't see why you'd expect there to be a limiter, or what good would it do. 

Quote

I'd imagine that the power curve for takeoff is an entirely different matter that isnt limited by max torque in most cases?

If power curve for takeoff (or acceleration?) isn't what you suspect to be limited, what is?

Quote

somewhat of a thread hijack, my apologies.

I think we're still hanging by a thread  since we're discussing the torque of a wheel that's specifically touted as being a torque powerhouse.

Edited February 27, 2020 by mrelwood