An advocacy for heavy wheels

[UniGrad]

First off I'll just mention that I don't believe any wheel should ever exceed 45kg (100 lb). Should probably keep it below 40kg.

Okay so I've heard a lot of people saying how heavy wheels aren't "true" EUCs. Because a true EUC is meant to be very portable.

Here's how I see it. A heavy wheel like the Sherman has far more range than lighter wheels meaning it does a much better job at replacing your car, the bus, train, tram ect. It can be your standalone vehicle.

Another thing is that the extra weight in itself brings several significant advantages.

1. More theft proof. If you leave it laying around for a minute at the shops ect. and someone get the idea of "hmm I might take this thing". When they go to lift it they'll realize it's gonna be real weird trying to carry it away inconspicuously.
Think Mr Bean trying to rob a bank 
Or they lift it while it's switched on and the wheel spins to 100 km/h while they're stuck holding on to it as it beeps like mad. They'd probably think it's a bomb at that point and start running.

2. Far more stable at speed and over road irregularities. I personally own a 16x and a Sherman, and I can tell you that the Sherman is far far more stable at speed. A good example is that I can ride the Sherman on sand at over 50km/h. Whereas I can only ride the 16x at about 20km/h on the same sand. And on the road it's about the same difference in stability. The Sherman can ride at 60km/h over fairly large bumps and potholes without the wheel twisting much. Whereas the 16x would twist a lot and cause dangerous wobbles over those same size bumps and potholes.

3. Far more stable for leaning into corners. This is actually one of the biggest things I've noticed. It's too bad that the Sherman pedals are so low because otherwise you could do much harder leans on it. Okay so.... when I lean hard on my 16x it feels far less stable and I need to control the angle of the wheel with my legs by applying a lot of force so that it stays at the correct lean angle. Other wise it wants to flap about from side to side. But with the Sherman when you lean it feels like a motorbike. The difference is night and day. The Sherman holds its lean angle steadily and doesn't require that you hold it in position with your legs.

4. Exercise. By lifting the heavier wheel you get a good workout. I've actually been using my Sherman as a dumbbell quite often and now enjoy lifting it whenever I have to because it has those bars that make it easy to grab. With my 16x I never had the desire to lift it. After lifting the Sherm a few times it's turned into a habit. Now I can lift it with one hand and do several bicep curls with it. Whereas when I first got it I needed 2 hands to lift it. Thanks for that extra strength Sherman! I'm not a big dude, I only weigh 130 lb so many people can train themselves to easily handle this wheel. And now the 16x feels super light whereas it used to feel heavy.

For many people lighter than myself the large wheel may be too difficult to take up and down stairs. This is what I say. If you have a large diameter wheel and you struggle to carry it up stairs. Then why not roll it up? Since the wheel is larger, it can easily be rolled up/down the steps. Turn on the wheel and it is pretty easy to do because the motor does half the work.

And the other complaint is about lifting it into a car. I'd ask how often do you really need to do this if the wheel is meant to be replacing the car in the first place? It's like complaining that you can't lift your motorbike onto your pickup truck all by yourself. If you ever do need to lift your EUC into your car and can't handle the weight, you can still do it! Get someone to help. But at the same time many people can manage lifting a 40kg wheel into a car so it would still have the benefits of a smaller wheel in terms of portability.

I also wanna mention that I still love more nimble wheels like the 16x. They are extremely nimble which is super fun and fantastic for commuting in super busy areas. But for very long and fast journeys, the heavy wheels are where it's at. And with the Sherman it feels like it has suspension with that super thick tyre. Talking about suspension though, I wouldn't want that on my wheel because I'd much rather have more range, more power, more reliability and more robustness for the weight penalty. And the wheel will have a way more compact design without the suspension.

If I could have suspension without any weight/size penalty then I'd want it. But it's not possible. And that weight/size penalty takes a lot away from any EUC due to the nature of these devices. That is that they're simple, small and lightweight vehicles.

Lastly I'll say this. Heavy wheels are fast and fast wheels are like drugs. For me it's more thrilling to ride the Sherman that it was to ride my Yamaha R1 superbike. And it's safer. And way cheaper to run. Win Win Win

But the Sherman doesn't have to be all about adrenaline doses. It's also a great wheel for long slow rides and enjoying nature trails.

[PLEASE_DELETE]

Deleted.

Edited March 18 by PLEASE_DELETE

[UniGrad]

Yeah that's fair enough. Even if an EUC could reach those speeds I wouldn't want to go that fast on a single wheel.

Small wheels are awesome in their own right. I love my 16x just as much as my Sherman.

[RetroThruster]

Now grab yourself an Mten3 and you'll be set, no stable should be without one imo. 

[PLEASE_DELETE]

Deleted.

Edited March 18 by PLEASE_DELETE

[AtlasP]

Ultimately EUCs are uniquely suited as an answer to the 'last mile problem', and it's no surprise that the largest, best-selling category are the last-mile wheels (V8F, 16S, etc). Of course there aren't hardcore last-mile enthusiasts, because the more of an enthusiast you become the longer and faster you want to ride. But enthusiasts need to stop the perpetual advocacy that everyone should be buying these ridiculously oversized and overpriced wheels, with speed and range that the vast majority of riders will never use. And instead of downplaying the small-mid-size category you all should be championing it as it is where EUCs shine, where EUCs are easier to sell, and really where the EUC market will grow the most (outside of niche enthusiasts). And out of 10 of those wheels that get sold, you may get 1 person who falls in love like you do and buys a bigger/faster wheel.

Edited December 5, 2020 by AtlasP

[Bridgeboy]

The Sherman is my favorite wheel due to its weight and stability, and large battery with high safety overhead. I typically ride between 30 MPH and 40 MPH with little desire to go faster than that. But knowing it can go a good 10 MPH+ faster than that gives me the comfort and confidence that I'm not risking cut-out if I hit a bump or something.

By comparison, my KS18XL now seems like a child's toy to me. Now that I have a Sherman I totally realize how much better a big and heavy wheel is. To me it's every bit as nimble as any of my other wheels; even at slow speeds...I can turn on a dime; I don't even relate to people's complaints of the low pedals. I've never had an issue.

And the range is great; I can ride between 30 to 40 MPH the whole time and get a good 60-miles out of it with 5 to 15% battery left over; and I'm at a riding weight of roughly 240 LBS.

I look forward to a future version of the Sherman with a good suspension. That would be perfection.

[meepmeepmayer]

42 minutes ago, AtlasP said:

Ultimately EUCs are uniquely suited as an answer to the 'last mile problem', and it's no surprise that the largest, best-selling category are the last-mile wheels (V8F, 16S, etc).

I think that's just the price. If Shermans were $1000, they would sell like V8s.

EUCs (and other PEVs like ebikes or escooters) are a new category, somewhere between what you can do with a bicycle and what you can do with a motorbike or car. Probably closer to the bicycle side. They can replace public transportation in many situations where the other alternative would just be a car. Let's say 15km/10km one way range, or even further. Faster + no physical effort makes more possible compared to a bicycle.

And if EUCs are used mostly as last-mile devices, that's also in big part due to the price of a serious wheel which could be used for more. Other reasons would be the lack of infrastructure - legality, reliable and good (safe!) bike paths, etc. Who wants to attempt more in an uncertain environment than last mile and limited financial investment?

But EUCs/PEVs fill the (hitherto quite empty) spectrum between bicycle and car, and can be used for much more. We'll only see that when you can do everything with a $1000 EUC and the infrastructure is there.

-

So big and badass EUCs are natural as far as I'm concerned. They don't need to be heavy, though. Is there any benefit (like stability) to a weight over 25kg? I think not.

I believe the distinction is between wheels that you purely ride (weight and size are not that important, but speed and stability/comfort are) and wheels that must also work when not ridden (not too heavy, not too big, trolley handle, easy to carry and take on public transportation, etc) where the specs are secondary.

Edited December 5, 2020 by meepmeepmayer

[Bridgeboy]

I think everyone trying to compare EUCs as a "replacement" for some other mode of utilitarian transportation, such as a car, is missing the main attraction that I believe will make them popular. They are a recreation vehicle for pure fun. 

I don't ride mine to get to any "physical" destination. I ride mine to get to an the "emotional" destination of fun and excitement.

The closest comparison I can make for them is Jet Skis and Wave Runners on the water. That's the kind of adrenaline fueled excitement you get from them, but on pavement and trails. Freedom to glide around and maneuver at will all over the place, but on land instead of water.

EDIT: Another comparison would be an alternative to snow skiing or snowboarding except you don't need a mountain, snow, or pay for a lift ticket.

Obviously they'll be used for different things by different people, but they have the ability to get popular strictly for recreation in addition as utilitarian transportation to reach destinations.

Edited December 5, 2020 by Bridgeboy

[AtlasP]

On 12/5/2020 at 3:41 PM, meepmeepmayer said:

I think that's just the price. If Shermans were $1000, they would sell like V8s.

Not a chance. Obviously the Sherman would sell like crazy (in EUC terms/numbers) at $1k, but you are ignoring just how many people are actively choosing a 32lb device over an 77lb device for taking on a train/etc, who are never going to go faster than 20 mph, who are maybe willing to wear a helmet & wrist guards at most but not a whole suit of armor, who are never going to go more than 5-10 miles at a time, who will never pair it to a phone (apart from initial setup if necessary) or read a forum, etc. The same way the vast majority of bicycles and scooters and skateboards and virtually all micro-mobility devices are used and have been for over a century. Because that's the real world outside this tiny bubble.

Edited December 7, 2020 by AtlasP

[Scottie888]

I use my Mten3 as a last mile commuter & short distance chore machine eg. groceries, mailbox & other such ilk. Its easy to toss in the car when I go downtown & park a few miles away for free parking & cruise to destination. I can't see using other heavier wheel for such purposes.

Wheels like the Sherman & Mpro are great for exploring the city & rides with the crew but they are in no way as useful as the Mten3 as true last mile device. Lifting 70lbs or more more in/out of a trunk is not something I look forward to.

Far's adrenaline goes, there's just as much thrill going 20+mph in the lil' wheel as 40mph in a big 'un. It's all a matter of perspective & how far to the edge one dares. Far's recreation goes, honestly if the Mten3 has more range, I'd ride it as much as my other wheels (offroad trails aside).

Much as in other modes of motorized transport, weight isn't a good thing. It's only a necessary evil.

[Bridgeboy]

1 hour ago, Scottie888 said:

Much as in other modes of motorized transport, weight isn't a good thing. It's only a necessary evil.

In this particular case of an EUC down near the ground while we're standing virtually straight upright, I respectfully disagree with this statement.

The heavy weight near the ground drops the overall center of gravity of the vehicle + rider and the result is much greater stability and control. I'm sure there's some engineers out there that can run some equations to provide evidence of this. It's at least like this for taller riders; the affect may be less prevalent for shorter people who already have a lower center of gravity.

 

 

Edited December 6, 2020 by Bridgeboy

[Bob Eisenman]

The battery chemistry adds lots of weight to the otherwise light, small radius and mobile (in battery solvent) lithium ion.

Some Lithium battery chemistries:

Lithium NCA (LiNiCoAlO2)

(Lithium, nickle, cobalt, aluminum oxide)

Li:    6.9   (molar mass in grams)

Ni:  58.7

Co: 58.9 

Al:  26.9

O2: 16.0 x 2 = 32

Total: 183 grams for (LiNiCoAlO2)

Lithium is 3.8 % of the total

**********
Lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4)

(Lithium iron phosphate)

Li:    6.9 (molar mass in grams)

Fe: 55.8

P:   30.9

O:  16.0 x 4 = 64

Total: 157.7 grams for (LiFePO4)

Lithium is 4.3 % of the total

https://www.convertunits.com/molarmass/P

Lithium is element #3 on the periodic table of the elements and has 3 protons. 

It's electron structure is 1S2 2S1 where the valence electron is 'unpaired' in the 2S orbital shell. 

The 1S2 orbital shell is 'closed' (2 paired electrons- one with quantum spin up and the other with quantum spin down) and doesn't loose/contribute electrons to circuits used in Lithium ion batteries.

For the lithium ion battery chemistry to work the metal atom of the lithium metal oxide at the cathode must gain or loose 1 electron (change its valence state). The lithium ion is present with other elements in ionic combinations like (LiNiCoAlO2) or (LiFePO4) at the cathode (+) and the Lithium ion (+1 charge) moves within the solvent to the (graphite) anode (-) during charging. During discharge the reverse happens and the lithium ions move through the solvent to the metal oxides at the cathode(+).

https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/how-does-lithium-ion-battery-work

The valence electrons of the metals in row/period 4 is more complicated than the lithium valence electron in row/period 2.

The battery chemistries for lithium include the heavier elements in row 4 of the periodic table. Oxides like PO4 add alot of mass too.

So for every contributed electron in a lithium ion battery all the other elements in the molecular formula need to be added in to the total contributing molecular formula (unit) of lithium ion charge.

More charge capacity makes for a very heavy battery for the longer range EUC because of the complex battery chemistries of lithium used in each battery cell.

My college chemistry is a little old and unused in memory but the overview written above gives a general idea to the concept of battery chemistry's used in rechargeable lithium ion batteries.🤭😉

Edited December 6, 2020 by Bob Eisenman

[Scottie888]

24 minutes ago, Bridgeboy said:

In this particular case of an EUC down near the ground while we're standing virtually straight upright, I respectfully disagree with this statement.

The heavy weight near the ground drops the overall center of gravity of the vehicle + rider and the result is much greater stability and control. I'm sure there's some engineers out there that can run some equations to provide evidence of this. It's at least like this for taller riders; the affect may be less prevalent for shorter people who already have a lower center of gravity.

 

 

What you're referring to isn't a weight issue per se but more of a CG issue IMO. I don't think there's any doubt that bringing the pedals lower will make for a more stable ride at speed. Designing the wheel to have its heavier/heaviest components lower will also assist in this. So will designing a more balanced (left/right) wheel. The same results will be achieved whether the wheel is 80lbs or 50lbs IMHO.

That said, moving the CG lower via pedal height &or weight distribution will affect handling, both high/low speed. A lower CG will mean a loss of nimbleness & ofcos, lower pedals will affect clearance in offroad performance & other aspects but that's a different debate.

[Bridgeboy]

3 minutes ago, Scottie888 said:

What you're referring to isn't a weight issue per se but more of a CG issue IMO. I don't think there's any doubt that bringing the pedals lower will make for a more stable ride at speed. Designing the wheel to have its heavier/heaviest components lower will also assist in this. So will designing a more balanced (left/right) wheel. The same results will be achieved whether the wheel is 80lbs or 50lbs IMHO.

That said, moving the CG lower via pedal height &or weight distribution will affect handling, both high/low speed. A lower CG will mean a loss of nimbleness & ofcos, lower pedals will affect clearance in offroad performance & other aspects but that's a different debate.

Well at least for me I can tell a definitive difference in stability and sense of assurance riding the Sherman vs my KS18XL. The Sherman is solid, like an anchor. The 18XL is light and flimsy feeling by comparison, like a toy.

[.....]

You are both correct. A lighter wheel has advantages and so does a heavier wheel. Center of gravity aside, the simple difference in weight being a benefit or not, typically boils down to intended use.    My sherman is heavy and rides like an anchor. My 18L rides effortlessly. I alos trust the 18L far more. There are many differences between the two, but weight is also part of the puzzle. Me, I would suspect a heavier wheel on the street and lighter wheel on the dirt, makes pretty good sense. Don't we all still recall how much nicer those old dated HEAVY cars ride, even on outdated suspension components? Not much for turns or economy, but you cant find a ride like that without the weight. Upgraded suspension on a lighter car is NOT the same. The answer is simple and always the same.... buy more wheels, light, heavy, small, big, cheap, expensive.. who cares? Buy more wheels!

Edited December 6, 2020 by ShanesPlanet

[KiwiMark]

I think my RS is a good size/weight/range/speed/torque wheel for 90% of what I would want to use it for.  Still, I might end up buying a Sherman eventually for those longer rides where you accept an extra 8kg of weight so you can go a few tens of kilometres further.  The Sherman would be similar in speed and torque, but it would definitely beat my RS for range, you know, because 3,200Wh is more than 1,800Wh.  I could still use my RS for shorter rides, but for longer rides you just accept more weight in exchange for the ability to last the distance.  A lighter wheel might seem easier to use, but if you have to wheel it 10km home after its batteries run out - is it really easier to use?

[Bob Eisenman]

Heavy battery shipping reference  for 84 volt Monster

2 batteries = 30 lbs total (less packing material when installed) for a 1600 WHr configuration

Weight distribution is on a vertical-orientation and extending from the base of the pedal column to almost the top of the case.

One 800 WHr battery for Monster (Monster can use up to 3 for 2400 WHr)

Shipping weight from eWheels

 

The contribution of the motor weight (less packing material but without the weight of the tire) to the total 84 Volt Monster

 

 

Edited December 6, 2020 by Bob Eisenman

[Bridgeboy]

1 hour ago, ShanesPlanet said:

You are both correct. A lighter wheel has advantages and so does a heavier wheel. Center of gravity aside, the simple difference in weight being a benefit or not, typically boils down to intended use.    My sherman is heavy and rides like an anchor. My 18L rides effortlessly. I alos trust the 18L far more. 

This is a great point which I think highlights the difference in opinions. It hits the nail on the head.

It all depends upon the individual rider.

Shane and I are the same height at 6'-3".  But Shane is 130 LBS which is nearly half of my 240 LBS riding weight. My weight is mostly suspended high above my long 36" legs, so the heavier wheel down low makes a significant difference in lowering the overall center of gravity of the mass that is moving. So it makes a much bigger noticeable effect of control and stability for me.

For Shane, the effect is less noticeable, and he still likes his 18L.

For larger and taller people, and heavier wheel is the ticket for feeling much more "grounded."

 

[Bob Eisenman]

13 minutes ago, Bridgeboy said:

For larger and taller people, and heavier wheel is the ticket for feeling much more "grounded."

My feelings about heavy wheels include the inevitable bail out or fall. No other occupations of time for motorized fun accept loss of control of the ridden device as part of the norm (with a few talented EUC rider exceptions). So....this opens the possibility of your wheel impacting something unintended while you are not riding upon it.

Edited December 6, 2020 by Bob Eisenman

[Bridgeboy]

9 minutes ago, Bob Eisenman said:

My feelings about heavy wheels include the inevitable bail out or fall. No other occupations of time for fun accept loss of control of the ridden device as part of the norm (with few talented exceptions). So....this opens the possibility of your wheel impacting something unintended while you are not riding it.

Well that's a fair statement. A flying object with more mass means more potential destruction to anything within its path.

But how does that mass compare to a motorcycle? A scooter? A car? By comparison, all these EUCs are significantly smaller and less massive than any other motorized vehicles out there.

I'd argue that the more massive Sherman makes it less likely that a larger person will ever fall off and will more consistently remain in control. I dispute that bail outs or falls are "inevitable." They aren't as long as you respect them and your own safety, as well as the safety of others, and don't act stupid.

Edited December 6, 2020 by Bridgeboy

[Bob Eisenman]

1 minute ago, Bridgeboy said:

I'd argue that the more massive Sherman makes it less likely that a larger person will ever fall off

Agreed

 

2 minutes ago, Bridgeboy said:

bail outs or falls are "inevitable."

Debatable....old saying was something like ...there are two kinds of riders....those who have fallen and those who eventually will.....but perhaps it's not valid with the Sherman.

[.....]

12 minutes ago, Bridgeboy said:

Well that's a fair statement. A flying object with more mass means more potential destruction to anything within its path.

But how does that mass compare to a motorcycle? A scooter? A car? By comparison, all these EUCs are significantly smaller and less massive than any other motorized vehicles out there.

I'd argue that the more massive Sherman makes it less likely that a larger person will ever fall off and will more consistently remain in control. I dispute that bail outs or falls are "inevitable." They aren't as long as you respect them and your own safety, as well as the safety of others, and don't act stupid.

Yup, euc's arent as fast and as heavy as some items. Of course they are also unregulated and uninsured, so its kind of a tossup. Im selfish so I don't concern myself with these things until I'm forced to.

As for thinking its NOT inevitable. Well, you are kinda right. It all depends on how long you ride. There are too many variables that we simply cannot control, to assume that on a long enough timeline, we wont eventually have to bail or get run over or get knocked off. So, I guess its not 'inevitable' as that would indicate there isnt a possibility that you win against the odds until you quit riding. Im a control freak and I HATE having to admit that even a perfect decision and perfect reaction on a perfect wheel, doenst ensure my success.. Murphy's law anyone?

Me, I am pretty sure I will fall off the sherman or faceplant or understeer a hispeed turn eventually. And then of course theres the other problems that were'nt rider error. I think the stablilty of the sherman gives a false sense of security, that may lead to a quick realization of the reality. Odds are odds, and I'm thinking the sherm is no more or less safer than my others. Its mostly in the rider, and the rider of my wheels isnt quite exemplary in skill or safety concerns. However, only my sherman will allow me to crash at 45+mph, so there's always that!

Edited December 6, 2020 by ShanesPlanet

[Bridgeboy]

1 minute ago, Bob Eisenman said:

Agreed

 

Debatable....old saying was something like ...there are two kinds of riders....those who have fallen and those who eventually will.....but perhaps it's not valid with the Sherman.

 

Here is one difference from other modes of transport that I confess: an uncontrolled Sherman at speed is like a ball that will keep going for awhile. It's one of the reasons I have not attempted very steep hill climbs with it yet. My fear is that if I don't make it all the way and I bail or fall off its going to be a very heavy bowling ball tumbling down the hill and can potentially hurt someone along the way.

The compact shape of it does not lend itself to stopping very quickly like a less round-shaped vehicle would...

[Bob Eisenman]

35 minutes ago, Bridgeboy said:

My fear is that