Jump to content

MSP Torque or MSP Speed having second thoughts


Recommended Posts

I put in my order for an MSP the other day and I'm having second thoughts on which motor to get. I was originally signed up for a 2500w motor since i'm 6'2" ~200 lbs but I was doing some reading about how the 2500w motor just EATS battery and I didn't know if the 2000w motor would be better and how much less torque there would actually be. I do like to go fast but if it takes forever to get there whats the point. I'm mainly going to be going around NYC and doing my commute to work in westchester and pretty much no offroading but the 18 in tire will be nice because the roads can be pretty crappy. The extra 800 bucks for the sherman is more than my wife will let me spend... for now. So how much slower off the line is it and is the extra top end worth it and does it have any extra range? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Wookz said:

I put in my order for an MSP the other day and I'm having second thoughts on which motor to get. I was originally signed up for a 2500w motor since i'm 6'2" ~200 lbs but I was doing some reading about how the 2500w motor just EATS battery and I didn't know if the 2000w motor would be better and how much less torque there would actually be. I do like to go fast but if it takes forever to get there whats the point. I'm mainly going to be going around NYC and doing my commute to work in westchester and pretty much no offroading but the 18 in tire will be nice because the roads can be pretty crappy. The extra 800 bucks for the sherman is more than my wife will let me spend... for now. So how much slower off the line is it and is the extra top end worth it and does it have any extra range? 

They share the same battery AFAIK. The 2500W torque edition MSP's top speed is 39 mph; cutoff speed = 41 mph. The top speed of the 2000W speed-edition MSP is about 43 mph, with cutoff speed being 44 mph. Correction further down. 

I'm actually considering the torque edition, since I personally find torque/acceleration to be much more important than top speed, whether it's for hill climbing or for reaching my cruising speed faster. I don't see myself riding past 35 mph anyway, so I'd gain nothing from the 2000W version's extra speed.

Range-wise, you'll drain either of them fast if you push them...on the torque edition, it's just down to how aggressively you ride it and how much you hot-dog it

Edited by travsformation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mrd777 said:

Stay with the plan man.. there’s a lot of banter about the two versions, but I can tell you by far the usability of the high torque 2500w version outweighs the extras 7-8 mph you might get out of the 2000w version. It’s rare that you are able to go that fast all the time.. it’s just talk, and not safe.

I’m loving the msp, it’s a champ going uphill or overtaking a Tour de France wannabe. It’s a seriously fast compact wheel that gets plenty of miles per charge. Marty’s test got just below 60 miles.

Nice! How many miles have you put on the MSP? I'm thinking of getting the 2500W version to replace my 18XL :D

This is subjective, but I entirely agree that the torque an acceleration outweigh that extra 8 mph unless you live somewhere where you can safely rides at those speeds, which are not safe IMHO anyway

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, meepmeepmayer said:

Personally, I'd definitely prefer the normal high-torque MSP over the high speed variant. It's just more fun unless you absolutely need that higher top speed.

I'd prefer the Sherman over both, though;)

Isn't it about time you upgrade? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, travsformation said:

They share the same battery AFAIK. The 2500W torque edition MSP's top speed is 39 mph; cutoff speed = 41 mph. The top speed of the 2000W speed-edition MSP is about 43 mph, with cutoff speed being 44 mph.

The 41 mph and 44 mph are the lift cut off speeds at full battery voltage? That'll mean a quite small difference...

7% less in top (lift cut off) speed (at full battery voltage) would mean just 7% more torque at lower speeds.

The 2500W label on the motor should/could mean a bit more sturdy build compared to the 2000W motor. And maybe bigger/stronger magnets? ?Increasing a bit more the torque capability?

So one of the big advantages of the high torque low speed version should be lower current consumption for the same torque at the same speed!

And other way round the higher safety margin/headroom at the same speed for the high speed version for higher speed riding.

Would be interesting how the limits of this two wheels really are, and were they "meet" exactly... To know which of these two "advantages" of these wheel are really noticable - and for whom this could be of interest in which range.

Anyhow

18 hours ago, Wookz said:

I was doing some reading about how the 2500w motor just EATS battery and I didn't know if the 2000w motor would be better

if driving both wheels similar (same speed, same acceleration) the 2500W version should eat less battery!

With the 2500W version one should have the possibility to eat up battery racing up mountains, with the 2000W version the same by higher speed driving.

Would be great to have someone like @Marty Backe to do his overheat hill and his range test with both wheels! Two very different burden situations with the same driver and driving behaviour...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Chriull said:

The 41 mph and 44 mph are the lift cut off speeds at full battery voltage? That'll mean a quite small difference...

7% less in top (lift cut off) speed (at full battery voltage) would mean just 7% more torque at lower speeds.

The 2500W label on the motor should/could mean a bit more sturdy build compared to the 2000W motor. And maybe bigger/stronger magnets? ?Increasing a bit more the torque capability?

So one of the big advantages of the high torque low speed version should be lower current consumption for the same torque at the same speed!

And other way round the higher safety margin/headroom at the same speed for the high speed version for higher speed riding.

Would be interesting how the limits of this two wheels really are, and were they "meet" exactly... To know which of these two "advantages" of these wheel are really noticable - and for whom this could be of interest in which range.

Anyhow

if driving both wheels similar (same speed, same acceleration) the 2500W version should eat less battery!

With the 2500W version one should have the possibility to eat up battery racing up mountains, with the 2000W version the same by higher speed driving.

Would be great to have someone like @Marty Backe to do his overheat hill and his range test with both wheels! Two very different burden situations with the same driver and driving behaviour...

I can tell you that I'm getting some incredible high-speed range performance from the Sherman. Kind of shocking actually. It was a 2500-watt motor.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

I can tell you that I'm getting some incredible high-speed range performance from the Sherman. Kind of shocking actually. It was a 2500-watt motor.

I wouldn't give too much on the watts printed on the motor.

Imho the big range advantage of the veteran lies, besides his huge battery capacity, in the the masses of paralleled cells!

So each cell (strand) has to deliver just "small" currents! And the less current burden is on a liion cell, the more "capacity it can deliver".

 The msps just have 4 217000 in parallel, the veteran ?10/11? 18650!

For 2000W motor input the 4p 21700 almost reach their max continous current rating, while the 10/11p 18650 "hardly notice anything"

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chriull said:

I wouldn't give too much on the watts printed on the motor.

Imho the big range advantage of the veteran lies, besides his huge battery capacity, in the the masses of paralleled cells!

So each cell (strand) has to deliver just "small" currents! And the less current burden is on a liion cell, the more "capacity it can deliver".

 The msps just have 4 217000 in parallel, the veteran ?10/11? 18650!

For 2000W motor input the 4p 21700 almost reach their max continous current rating, while the 10/11p 18650 "hardly notice anything"

So the 2000 watt specification on the motor is just as meaningless as the 2500 watt specification???

I guess I don't really care. All I know is that this damn heavy wheel is getting amazing range.

Very interesting though, what you say about the bigger battery.

Edited by Marty Backe
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

So the 2000 watt specification on the motor is just as meaningless as the 2500 watt specification???

These numbers, if they are somehow the result of a comparable testing procedure, should just specify the continous power/"heat dissipation" possibilities.

This number just has to be in about the "right range" and as you wrote one does not need to care about.

The current capabilities of the motor wires/connectors and mosfets should still be  (?by far?) the bottleneck.

15 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

Very interesting though, what you say about the bigger battery

If one looks at the ncr18650ga (?hope i got the right cell...?) at http://www.dampfakkus.de/akkutest.php?id=609 it delivers

3020mAh at 2A

2900 mAh at 3A

2700 mAh at 5A

~2000mAh at 10A

from 4.2V downto 3V.

Unfortionately the discharge test for the lg 21700 is not on this side by now...

But it's officially a 3500mAh cell - that's as described in the datasheet only achievable at 0.7A(0.2C) discharge current from 4.2V downto 2.5V....

Ps.: The datasheet (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.orbtronic.com/content/Datasheet-specs-Sanyo-Panasonic-NCR18650GA-3500mah.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiQhtuqubjqAhUkVBUIHcuSBuQQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw03vxLRRiQBZodvELywP62x) gives better specs for such discharge tests...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, travsformation said:

Isn't it about time you upgrade? ;)

Yep. So far my wallet had to veto that. But I'm still happy with my ACM.

MSP is tempting, though. Sherman is even more tempting. Ideal would be a 16 inch Sherman ("16 inch" like the Nik/16X so 18 actually) with lots of torque.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chriull said:

The 41 mph and 44 mph are the lift cut off speeds at full battery voltage? That'll mean a quite small difference...

Wait, the info I provided is incorrect. U-Stride states the cutoff speed of the 2500W MSPro at 41 mph, and Fantomas cut it off at 69.2 & 71.4 km/h (so 43 & 44 mph). I somehow mixed those up and gave two stats that are both for the torque version. I can't seem to find any for the speed edition, only that lift cut-off at 100% battery is 61 mph / 98 km/h. No one nuts enough to try to cut it off...?

EUCservice's MSS has a top speed of 47 mph / 75 km/h (looks like no one's tested the cutoff speed), but it also has a bigger battery, so if that's anything to go by, it should be in that vicinity, around 39 mph / 62 km/h (without cutting off) for the torque version vs..... 45 mph / 72 km/h for the speed edition...or something in that vicinity...?

Edited by travsformation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, meepmeepmayer said:

Yep. So far my wallet had to veto that. But I'm still happy with my ACM.

MSP is tempting, though. Sherman is even more tempting. Ideal would be a 16 inch Sherman ("16 inch" like the Nik/16X so 18 actually) with lots of torque.

2020 might be proving a complete sh*tshow in every other aspect, but in terms of new wheels...:efeeec645d:

If you aren't in a hurry, just keep saving up, who knows what the 2nd half of the year, and 2021 will bring 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Chriull said:

These numbers, if they are somehow the result of a comparable testing procedure, should just specify the continous power/"heat dissipation" possibilities.

This number just has to be in about the "right range" and as you wrote one does not need to care about.

The current capabilities of the motor wires/connectors and mosfets should still be  (?by far?) the bottleneck.

If one looks at the ncr18650ga (?hope i got the right cell...?) at http://www.dampfakkus.de/akkutest.php?id=609 it delivers

3020mAh at 2A

2900 mAh at 3A

2700 mAh at 5A

~2000mAh at 10A

from 4.2V downto 3V.

Unfortionately the discharge test for the lg 21700 is not on this side by now...

But it's officially a 3500mAh cell - that's as described in the datasheet only achievable at 0.7A(0.2C) discharge current from 4.2V downto 2.5V....

Ps.: The datasheet (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.orbtronic.com/content/Datasheet-specs-Sanyo-Panasonic-NCR18650GA-3500mah.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiQhtuqubjqAhUkVBUIHcuSBuQQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw03vxLRRiQBZodvELywP62x) gives better specs for such discharge tests...

Do you have any thoughts regarding the Sherman being able to operate down to ~74-volts, whereas Gotway's kick you off the wheel at 80-volts? Are they able to do this because of the number of cells used?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

Do you have any thoughts regarding the Sherman being able to operate down to ~74-volts,

That's about 3.08V per cell. As KS does. Afair they were down to 3.0V per cell once and now at 3.15V. or with different wheels at different limits?

20 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

Are they able to do this because of the number of cells used?

Cells perform worse at lower voltages, but by 10/11p configuration burden per cell stays much lower. So yes, that's a great argument for lowering the limit.

20 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

whereas Gotway's kick you off the wheel at 80-volts?

Don't know why GW stayed with 3.3V. they had always bigger (stronger, more cells in parallel) batteries as KS.

By now with the 21700 cells it's imho good that they stayed at 3.3V per cell. KS with their "low parallel" configurations should imho reconsider their lower limit. 21700 have less  internal resistance, but the used LG (does KS use them too?) don't have a great rated continous current...

As stated at batteryuniversity.com the higher the number of cells in series (100.8V are 24s!) the easier they tend to get out of balance.

And out of balance packs under burden with low voltages lead to individual cells beeing pushed to dangerously low voltages. Balancing of actual BMS is not really great - so a cell "pushed down" will not be charged fully - the next time under burden at a low voltage limit it gets pushed down even further. Until very soon the pack is dead...:(

So maybe just GW is a bit more conservative, KS a bit more risky? Maybe because GW use 24s (100.8V) config and KS stayed with 20s and that "evens out"?

Maybe the 24s10/11p config of the veteran is still conservative?

... so we'll see - much written, not too much said... :thumbup:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Chriull said:

That's about 3.08V per cell. As KS does. Afair they were down to 3.0V per cell once and now at 3.15V. or with different wheels at different limits?

Cells perform worse at lower voltages, but by 10/11p configuration burden per cell stays much lower. So yes, that's a great argument for lowering the limit.

Don't know why GW stayed with 3.3V. they had always bigger (stronger, more cells in parallel) batteries as KS.

By now with the 21700 cells it's imho good that they stayed at 3.3V per cell. KS with their "low parallel" configurations should imho reconsider their lower limit. 21700 have less  internal resistance, but the used LG (does KS use them too?) don't have a great rated continous current...

As stated at batteryuniversity.com the higher the number of cells in series (100.8V are 24s!) the easier they tend to get out of balance.

And out of balance packs under burden with low voltages lead to individual cells beeing pushed to dangerously low voltages. Balancing of actual BMS is not really great - so a cell "pushed down" will not be charged fully - the next time under burden at a low voltage limit it gets pushed down even further. Until very soon the pack is dead...:(

So maybe just GW is a bit more conservative, KS a bit more risky? Maybe because GW use 24s (100.8V) config and KS stayed with 20s and that "evens out"?

Maybe the 24s10/11p config of the veteran is still conservative?

... so we'll see - much written, not too much said... :thumbup:

Love reading this, and maybe it's making sense considering what I'm seeing with the Veteran regards range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

Love reading this, and maybe it's making sense considering what I'm seeing with the Veteran regards range.

Yep I think it's the "18XL effect". Fully justified with a 10p battery, the voltage drop must be tiny compared to other wheels. Clever design!

39 minutes ago, Chriull said:

or with different wheels at different limits?

18XL 3.0V, 16X 3.15V

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, travsformation said:

Wait, the info I provided is incorrect. U-Stride states the cutoff speed of the 2500W MSPro at 41 mph, and Fantomas cut it off at 69.2 & 71.4 km/h (so 43 & 44 mph). I somehow mixed those up and gave two stats that are both for the torque version. I can't seem to find any for the speed edition, only that lift cut-off at 100% battery is 61 mph / 98 km/h. No one nuts enough to try to cut it off...?

Thanks for clarification! Introducing a cut off speed as UStride states in the video is quite ähhh strange - that's only true for exactly one burden and one battery voltage... :(

And for my current consumption/safety margin considerations absolutely irrelevant. The 98 km/h lift cut off speed at full battery voltage woukd have been the value characterizing the wheel (although one could never ride at this speed!). Together with the lift cut off speed of the high torque version one could compare them (a bit, theoretically...)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Unicycle Freedom said:

Up to Sherman, or waiting new Gotway with suspension.

The Sherman is an interesting option and a great long-distance cruising wheel, and fine for mild off-roading (not too rutted because of the ground clearance, not too crazy because it's tough to brake and burned up on Marty's overheat hill test), but for me, too heavy and impractical for day-to-day use. If you do consider it, wait for the revised version further down the road, once they've corrected the issues with the 1st batch. 

Gotway has apparently announced a new wheel with suspension and a 3500W motor and 2700Wh in batteries. Might be worth checking out if that's what you're after

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...