"Veteran" New brand of high performance EUC's

[Marty Backe]

6 hours ago, travsformation said:

 This is a big issue for me personally. Depending on how "slight" that angle is and how fast you're going, that could lead to some nasty falls... 

Worries me for rutted off-roading too, I really hope they address this

Goooooo Jason! It's awesome that we have him lobbying on our behalf, keeping manufacturers in check and trying to get them up to Western design and safety standards (insomuch as possible) 

They probably will on their next wheel. I can't see this being updated on the current wheel. The Sherman is absolutely not a wheel for rutted trails, etc. I think the MSP is still kill for off-road usage.

[Marty Backe]

2 hours ago, Ben Kim said:

Do us a favor, do a lift speed test, pedal test (soft/medium/hard) on both of these boards (if you get around to testing both) because I suspect there will be some changes in that regard. 

I also don't know why he's so determined to make that wheel climb the hill considering this motor is wound for top speed not torque.  One would think after so many years in the game he'd understand.  People bellyached for torque, then they get the MSPro.  People bitch about the top speed, then they get a speed version.  You have to give up something on one end to get something on the other.  I somehow doubt there is much that can be done given the characteristics of the motor (which is why I personally bought it).

But the MSX can even climb better than the Veteran. I'm not a motor guy so maybe you're correct. I'll know when I get these new boards

[eve]

I dont care if climbs a steep hill or not. I just want it to start beeping/tilt back instead of blowing up.

[Ben Kim]

1 minute ago, Antec said:

No doubt the top speed is ground breaking but at this rate I wouldn't take a sherman offroad where a msp would thrive  

The sherman shouldnt of been released this early is what I'm trying to say, maybe for testing yes but the wheels are being sold to the public now.

Some will say the the units people are receiving are the final versions with  new revision boards, but I think Its a little early to confirm which ones have the latest revision boards or not.

Let's hope the sort it quickly.

All the best 

Your response clearly indicates you don't know WHY the sherman has a higher top speed than the rest of market.  That reason is WHY the Sherman will fare poorly on these type of tests.  In case you simply don't understand what to search for, (low kv motor = efficient at low speeds, inefficient at high speeds, high kv motor = inefficient at low speeds, efficient at high speeds).  You could meet in the middle like many EUCs do, but then you won't get the top speed the Sherman possesses.  

If you don't like the fact it can't survive overheat hill, fair enough,  you can wait for a torque version if they decide to do so.  Just know you are going to cost yourself top speed, and higher energy consumption at those higher speeds.  

[Marty Backe]

48 minutes ago, Ben Kim said:

And people are trying to change it based on a slope climb test that isn't applicable to people in the real world.  Those people can buy MSPro torque version.

Jason has verbalized to me that he's worried about the 230-pound guys who are going to buy this wheel and it's going to fail when they ride it up inclines, etc. He figures if it can pass my test than it'll easily work reliably in the real world. His primary motivation is avoiding after sales warranty work.

[Ben Kim]

2 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

But the MSX can even climb better than the Veteran. I'm not a motor guy so maybe you're correct. I'll know when I get these new boards

Unless you can account for ambient temperatures and do your slope testing in identical conditions, it proves nothing tbh.

This goes back to what I said about motors.  High kv, vs low kv.  Do you still think the Sherman has magical abilities to make it achieve a 107 kmh no-load speed vs the 94 on the MSX? 

[travsformation]

2 hours ago, Ben Kim said:

I also don't know why he's so determined to make that wheel climb the hill considering this motor is wound for top speed not torque.  One would think after so many years in the game he'd understand. 

51 minutes ago, Ben Kim said:

And people are trying to change it based on a slope climb test that isn't applicable to people in the real world.  Those people can buy MSPro torque version.

You're missing an important point here: A heavier rider & gentler hill could have similar results. And heavy riders are naturally going to be attracted to the most powerful EUC on the market, for obvious reasons. What's wrong with stress-testing things so that future batches have more fail-proof components? 

Edited July 14, 2020 by travsformation

[eve]

16 minutes ago, Ben Kim said:

I see the same thing happening on the V11 thread, ONE youtuber complains about pedal scraping so they make it have the highest pedal height to where it's laughable.

There is nothing laughable about the wheel.

1. The inmotion vision for the wheel was to be good at offroad. Without higher pedals it cant. 

2. V11 is very manoeuvrable. Those higher pedals are necessary.

3. That more tilt is also welcome. 

Overall the higher and more tilted pedals improved the wheel even if it gives you a laugh.

 

 

[Ben Kim]

1 minute ago, Marty Backe said:

Jason has verbalized to me that he's worried about the 230-pound guys who are going to buy this wheel and it's going to fail when they ride it up inclines, etc. He figures if it can pass my test than it'll easily work reliably in the real world. His primary motivation is avoiding after sales warranty work.

Then he should push Veteran to make a torque version for those guys and perhaps write a new tech article on his site blog detailing the nuances of motor windings so these fat guys don't buy EUCs that don't suit their use case. 

The furthest Veteran should take this IMO is to add an overcurrent alarm based on speed, because doing anything else will simply lead to gimping what makes the Sherman great.  

[Ben Kim]

2 minutes ago, travsformation said:

You're missing an important point here: A heavier rider & gentler hill could have similar results. And heavy riders are naturally going to be attracted to the most powerful EUC on the market, for obvious reasons. What's wrong with stress-testing things so that future batches have more fail-proof components? 

You're missing an even bigger point, the only solution to this is to redesign the motor for greater efficiency down low (again, high kv vs low kv), which would lead to a lower top speed.  I sound like a broken record at this point.  

Unless Veteran/Gotway decide to up the voltage, you have a choice.  Torque or speed.  This wheel was designed for speed, and perhaps wheel vendors such as eWheels should educate their prospective buyers on suitable purchases for their use case. 

[Marty Backe]

2 minutes ago, Ben Kim said:

Unless you can account for ambient temperatures and do your slope testing in identical conditions, it proves nothing tbh.

This goes back to what I said about motors.  High kv, vs low kv.  Do you still think the Sherman has magical abilities to make it achieve a 107 kmh no-load speed vs the 94 on the MSX? 

Something that I can't show in a video is how a motor feels when you are riding it in stressful conditions. Some motors grind, click, and make all kinds of not-to-pleasant sounds when struggling. Some don't.

When riding the Sherman on non-Overheat Hill inclines of a moderate nature, it's clear that it's weaker. In some ways it reminds me of the Z10.

So I comfortable saying that the MSX (and of course MSP) have more low-speed power than the Sherman.

Even if Veteran made no changes I'd still buy this wheel because it's a great cruiser and very nice in more mellow off-road conditions.

[Ben Kim]

1 minute ago, Marty Backe said:

Something that I can't show in a video is how a motor feels when you are riding it in stressful conditions. Some motors grind, click, and make all kinds of not-to-pleasant sounds when struggling. Some don't.

When riding the Sherman on non-Overheat Hill inclines of a moderate nature, it's clear that it's weaker. In some ways it reminds me of the Z10.

So I comfortable saying that the MSX (and of course MSP) have more low-speed power than the Sherman.

Even if Veteran made no changes I'd still buy this wheel because it's a great cruiser and very nice in more mellow off-road conditions.

Now you understand!  Don't f***ing change the wheel.  It's a great wheel for its use case (long distance road riding).  Perhaps the shell design is a bit misleading making it appear like it's meant for off-road, but when you ride it, it's more akin to a BMW M5 than a Hummer.  

[Marty Backe]

5 minutes ago, Ben Kim said:

Then he should push Veteran to make a torque version for those guys and perhaps write a new tech article on his site blog detailing the nuances of motor windings so these fat guys don't buy EUCs that don't suit their use case. 

The furthest Veteran should take this IMO is to add an overcurrent alarm based on speed, because doing anything else will simply lead to gimping what makes the Sherman great.  

I hear what you're saying, but I wonder out of the hundreds being ordered, what percentage plan on using the Sherman like the NYC folks (extreme high speed)? I really don't know the answer. But maybe Jason does and he's willing to sacrifice the higher speed for the people who really want the wheel for its range and stability (me). I'm just speculating, I have no idea what the truth is.

[Ben Kim]

Just now, Marty Backe said:

I hear what you're saying, but I wonder out of the hundreds being ordered, what percentage plan on using the Sherman like the NYC folks (extreme high speed)? I really don't know the answer. But maybe Jason does and he's willing to sacrifice the higher speed for the people who really want the wheel for its range and stability (me). I'm just speculating, I have no idea what the truth is.

Then Jason needs to push Veteran for a fat-man friendly torque version of the Sherman, like I said earlier, not change the wheel as designed.  I know plenty of NYC riders pre-ordered this wheel from eWheels, and I'm sure he'd hate to lose those. 

[Jon Stern]

5 hours ago, Ben Kim said:

Just out of curiosity, do you understand how they managed to get the Sherman to have such a high top speed with the same voltage as an equivalent Gotway wheel? 

Once you know and research that question, you'll know why your automobile argument is invalid. 

(I wouldn't take a Ferrari off-roading where a Hummer would thrive).  

Veteran gave some of us exactly what we wanted.  Nothing would upset me more than a vendor changing things to appease one crowd to upset another.   That's why there are different wheels for different use cases.  You want to tackle overheat hill, go buy an MSpro.  You want efficient high speed on the street, the Sherman is your choice.  If Veteran wants to go the route of a torque and speed version, by all means.  Don't f*** up the wheel for those who want speed just to pass some asinine slope test.

I see the same thing happening on the V11 thread, ONE youtuber complains about pedal scraping so they make it have the highest pedal height to where it's laughable.  These companies need to stick to their guns; there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all EUC.  

You're correct that the Sherman isn't optimized for this kind of high torque condition. The question should be, what happens to the wheel when ridden outside its design envelope?

EUCs should shut down in some way (fuses, thermal cut off, or something) instead of blowing up.

A Ferrari taken off road would bottom out and probably would take some damage, but the engine wouldn't explode.

Alien Rides does an e-scooter test on a hill in SF. I've watched a few of these and each time the weak scooters just stop part way up. I've never seen one explode. That's the behavior we should demand for EUCs.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Jon Stern

[eve]

3 minutes ago, Jon Stern said:

Alien Rides does a e-scooter test on a hill in SF. I've watched a few of these and each time the weak scooters just stop part way up. I've never seen one explode. That's the behavior we should demand for EUCs.

Yes. My eSkate also just stops when the hill is too steep. The least it could do is start beeping but it didnt even do that!

[Jon Stern]

5 minutes ago, eve said:

Yes. My eSkate also just stops when the hill is too steep. The least it could do is start beeping but it didnt even do that!

It's not easy to do this for an EUC, but it's the behavior we need to demand as consumers.

The key to it is extensive testing and engineering refinement. Instead of having multiple possible failure points, they should improve the design to the point where under all testing conditions there's just one component that fails (across all reasonable temperature conditions). Once you get to that point, you can look at ways of monitoring that component (current/temp) and trigger a shut down just before it would blow.

[Ben Kim]

3 minutes ago, Jon Stern said:

You're correct that the Sherman isn't optimized for this kind of high torque condition. The question should be, what happens to the wheel when ridden outside its design envelope?

EUCs should shut down in some way (fuses, thermal cut off, or something) instead of blowing up.

A Ferrari taken off road would bottom out and probably would take some damage, but the engine wouldn't explode.

Alien Rides does an e-scooter test on a hill in SF. I've watched a few of these and each time the weak scooters just stop part way up. I've never seen one explode. That's the behavior we should demand for EUCs.

EUCs should shut down in some way (fuses, thermal cut off, or something) instead of blowing up.

A Ferrari taken off road would bottom out and probably would take some damage, but the engine wouldn't explode.

Alien Rides does a e-scooter test on a hill in SF. I've watched a few of these and each time the weak scooters just stop part way up. I've never seen one explode. That's the behavior we should demand for EUCs.

They have EUCs for people concerned for safety mechanisms, I think Kingsong and Inmotion fit that niche.  You also fail to understand scooters have a hard maximum current designed into the controllers nor do they have a gyroscope keeping the user balanced.  The worst thing that happens when a scooter shuts down is you will coast to a stop and have mechanical brakes as a backup.  

The very nature of an EUC prevents them from having any sort of an amp limit because tilt dictates power requested.  If the requested power cannot be delivered, it shuts down.   By having an amp limit the wheel would be more susceptible to cutting out.  The safety mechanisms that Kingsong and Inmotion use are speed based; however you can make any EUC cut out if you request enough current, which heavier riders have an easier time doing.  The band-aid solution that Gotway incorporates at the expense of comfort is to make the pedals rock hard making it higher effort with the wheel being less susceptible to heavier riders requesting too much current. 

Like I am saying for a second time, an overcurrent alarm would be helpful, but don't change the fundamentals of the wheel.  

[FullTilt]

I think we're confounding some issues here:

1) Board failure 

2) Motor choice and the associated ability to climb vs speed

Should be easier to find a solution to #1, which I think most will be in agreement. The wheel will still struggle with steeper hills, make noises and maybe cutout, but the board won't be fried, so you would be able to power up the wheel again and ride home. 

I think the solution to #2 unfortunately will result in bifurcation of models like the MSS vs MSP. You can't please everyone where tradeoffs are involved currently. Maybe in the future with 3500w+ motors like what Gotway is now playing with and evolution in battery technology. 

 

 

[Marty Backe]

21 minutes ago, Jon Stern said:

You're correct that the Sherman isn't optimized for this kind of high torque condition. The question should be, what happens to the wheel when ridden outside its design envelope?

EUCs should shut down in some way (fuses, thermal cut off, or something) instead of blowing up.

A Ferrari taken off road would bottom out and probably would take some damage, but the engine wouldn't explode.

Alien Rides does an e-scooter test on a hill in SF. I've watched a few of these and each time the weak scooters just stop part way up. I've never seen one explode. That's the behavior we should demand for EUCs.

EUCs should shut down in some way (fuses, thermal cut off, or something) instead of blowing up.

A Ferrari taken off road would bottom out and probably would take some damage, but the engine wouldn't explode.

Alien Rides does a e-scooter test on a hill in SF. I've watched a few of these and each time the weak scooters just stop part way up. I've never seen one explode. That's the behavior we should demand for EUCs.

What seemingly everyone (or nearly so) forgets is that EUC's are one wheel self-balancing machines. An e-scooter can simply stop and the person riding it won't faceplant.

If the developers of EUCs could engineer sensors that would tell them that the user is going slow up a steep hill and it's then OK to shut the wheel down because their injuries would be minimum, then great.

But their algorithms aren't that smart. The controller doesn't change it's behavior based on speed, apparently. If I'm moving at 30-mph I sure as hell don't want the wheel to just shut down to prevent the board from going up in smoke. I want the board to struggle mightily until the very end. But if I'm on a steep incline at 5-mph, sure, preemptively shut down the board and let me faceplant.

Maybe someday the controllers will be smarter, but I suspect it's a challenging problem to solve.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Marty Backe

[Ben Kim]

Just now, FullTilt said:

I think we're confounding some issues here:

1) Board failure 

2) Motor choice and the associated ability to climb vs speed

Should be easier to find a solution to #1, which I think most will be in agreement. The wheel will still struggle with steeper hills, make noises and maybe cutout, but the board won't be fried, so you would be able to power up the wheel again and ride home. 

I think the solution to #2 unfortunately will result in bifurcation of models like the MSS vs MSP. You can't please everyone where tradeoffs are involved currently. Maybe in the future with 3500w+ motors like what Gotway is now playing with and evolution in battery technology. 

 

 

in-line fuses would be a good idea.  Problem with that solution on the Sherman is each battery is directly connected to the board, not a daisy chain like most manufacturers. Not impossible to work around, but will require a board redesign.  

[Jon Stern]

11 minutes ago, Ben Kim said:

They have EUCs for people concerned for safety mechanisms, I think Kingsong and Inmotion fit that niche.  You also fail to understand scooters have a hard maximum current designed into the controllers nor do they have a gyroscope keeping the user balanced.  The worst thing that happens when a scooter shuts down is you will coast to a stop and have mechanical brakes as a backup.  

The very nature of an EUC prevents them from having any sort of an amp limit because tilt dictates power requested.  If the requested power cannot be delivered, it shuts down.   By having an amp limit the wheel would be more susceptible to cutting out.  The safety mechanisms that Kingsong and Inmotion use are speed based; however you can make any EUC cut out if you request enough current, which heavier riders have an easier time doing.  The band-aid solution that Gotway incorporates at the expense of comfort is to make the pedals rock hard making it higher effort with the wheel being less susceptible to heavier riders requesting too much current. 

Like I am saying for a second time, an overcurrent alarm would be helpful, but don't change the fundamentals of the wheel.  

I meant to state that this is a difficult engineering challenge for an EUC (for the reasons you state), but hard engineering problems get solved when customers demand it. I do understand the difference between e-scooters and EUC. My point in talking about e-scooters was a comparison of user experience. It was not intended to imply the engineering challenges were the same.

I'm not suggesting that a catastrophic can be avoided 100%, but it can definitely be reduced to an extreme corner case. Of course, a shut down will throw off the rider, but if you shut down just before the board was about to fry anyway, that outcome is the same.

The issue EUCs have is they are insufficiently tested, and have multiple failure points.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Jon Stern

[Chriull]

26 minutes ago, Jon Stern said:

A Ferrari taken off road would bottom out and probably would take some damage, but the engine wouldn't explode.

Yeah - they even start burning at standstill

Scnr

[Ben Kim]

2 minutes ago, Jon Stern said:

I meant to state that this is a difficult engineering challenge for an EUC (for the reasons you state), but hard engineering problems get solved when customers demand it.

I'm not suggesting that a catastrophic can be avoided 100%, but it can definitely be reduced to an extreme corner case. Of course, a shut down will throw off the rider, but if you shut down just before the board was about to fry anyway, that outcome is the same.

The issue EUCs have is they are insufficiently tested, and have multiple failure points.

Everyone knows the early adopters are beta testers, it goes for virtually every new EUC that comes to market.  However, making kneejerk decisions based on an unrealistic use case that fundamentally change the wheel are something that is unacceptable.  Every PEV has multiple failure points, to be honest, on EUCs the biggest one is the control board.  However, some common sense and safeguarding can significantly reduce said risks by educating the end user (don't ride too long in very hot weather, don't overtorque the wheel if you're particularly heavy, etc.)

[Jon Stern]

5 minutes ago, Ben Kim said:

in-line fuses would be a good idea.  Problem with that solution on the Sherman is each battery is directly connected to the board, not a daisy chain like most manufacturers. Not impossible to work around, but will require a board redesign.  

Fuses are not a great solution, because the components that can fail (MOSFETs/caps) will do so at different currents depending on their temperature. A fuse cannot emulate that behavior.