Jump to content

INMOTION V12 (pre-release)


Inmotion Global

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, UniVehje said:

It just wants to keep the pedals level.

Exactly, I accelerate by leaning, or I have the same acceleration staying somehow upright, but rotating the wheel forward with my knee grabbing it.
I obviously see this difference in the sand, where you can't lean because of poor traction, yet you need the wheel to spin to not stop so you "torque" it with your knee.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, GPW said:

V12 3.7s, 16X 3.3s, Nikola+ 100V 3.6s, Nikola 84V 4.2s

No no no, those can not be real! I tried accelerating on MSX, Nikola 84V, and 16X: MSX 6.2 sec, Nikola 8.6 sec, and the 16X didn’t even get to 40km/h!

The above is just to point out that you really should look into @UniVehje’s posts much closer than into any EUC acceleration tests. I didn’t really measure any accelerations, because it’s completely pointless. The Nikola felt unsafe without pads, so I didn’t have the guts to accelerate faster. The MSX was my daily rider for 14000km with v3 of my DIY pads, of course it was the fastest. And for a 105kg rider to accelerate an unfamiliar 16X to 40km/h fast would’ve been a suicide.

 The times don’t mean anything else than how secure the wheel with it’s current setup feels to this one rider on that specific day. It says absolutely nothing about how fast you’ll want to or be able to accelerate, or how effortless it feels.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I wouldn't overanalyze that data I posted. Hoped my caveat that it was "not a scientific answer by any means" might preempt. It's just one guy attempting to max out acceleration on different wheels - many caveats apply, take it for what it's worth. I certainly won't be submitting the data to a peer reviewed academic journal for publication anytime soon ;).  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Camenbert said:

Exactly, I accelerate by leaning, or I have the same acceleration staying somehow upright, but rotating the wheel forward with my knee grabbing it.
I obviously see this difference in the sand, where you can't lean because of poor traction, yet you need the wheel to spin to not stop so you "torque" it with your knee.

Which ever way you look at it, it's still a matter of centre of gravity. I'm not quite sure what you mean but it sounds like you are saying there is an alternative way to accelerate.  But I think it's just an alternative way to cause the centre of gravity to move in front of the axle. You wouldn't stay on the wheel if there was a way to get the wheel to accelerate without you falling forward and the wheel catching you. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mrelwood said:

No no no, those can not be real! I tried accelerating on MSX, Nikola 84V, and 16X: MSX 6.2 sec, Nikola 8.6 sec, and the 16X didn’t even get to 40km/h!

The above is just to point out that you really should look into @UniVehje’s posts much closer than into any EUC acceleration tests. I didn’t really measure any accelerations, because it’s completely pointless. The Nikola felt unsafe without pads, so I didn’t have the guts to accelerate faster. The MSX was my daily rider for 14000km with v3 of my DIY pads, of course it was the fastest. And for a 105kg rider to accelerate an unfamiliar 16X to 40km/h fast would’ve been a suicide.

 The times don’t mean anything else than how secure the wheel with it’s current setup feels to this one rider on that specific day. It says absolutely nothing about how fast you’ll want to or be able to accelerate, or how effortless it feels.

Yup, point taken and Uni's post was informative as well. Guess I'm just gonna just have to see how the V12 feels to me. For science, of course.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UniVehje said:

Which ever way you look at it, it's still a matter of centre of gravity. I'm not quite sure what you mean but it sounds like you are saying there is an alternative way to accelerate.  But I think it's just an alternative way to cause the centre of gravity to move in front of the axle. You wouldn't stay on the wheel if there was a way to get the wheel to accelerate without you falling forward and the wheel catching you. 

Man, you look experienced, you maybe have yet to go in soft sand to see that accelerating can be done by leaning or torquing.
The outcome of those 2 way to call power are different (what is different than accelerating, accelerating is a consequence) :

If you lean in sand, you'll "face plan" (well at 5 kph) before to you got enough power to overcome the increased resistance of soft sand.
What you have to do instead is to keep centered your gravity and constant speed (slower, easier), but twist the wheel forward, to push a lot more of power against that resistance of soft sand.

I guess is the same in full acceleration test, leaning a lot expecting the wheel to follow is risky - so you naturally end leaving some room.
In the other hand, you can twist forward hardly your wheel, then lean to keep the balance, as a reaction.
This way you might get Adam's wrongway acceleration numbers....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GPW said:

It's just one guy attempting to max out acceleration on different wheels

The point was not so much to bash the amount of peer revieweable scientific content of Adam’s acceleration tests, but to explain that his acceleration times have exactly zero relevance to what you’re after.

 Firstly, do you want to achieve the absolutely fastest acceleration by any means necessary, or do you want the acceleration to be effortless so that a smaller lean would cause a faster acceleration? Because they come from different parameters of the wheel. So you may need to think it through more closely than just “maxing out the acceleration”.

 If you want to accelerate as fast as possible by any means necessary, you need pads that make you feel secure while leaning forward like crazy on an EUC that has huge amounts of absolute power, the kind that the MSP and EX.N are famous for. But accelerating like that takes a lot of effort.

 If you want the most effortless acceleration, you need a small tire diameter. Simple as that. The riding mode affects this as well, so be sure to stay away from the hardest riding modes. Inmotion has the best adjustability, but every manufacturer has a signature feel that you need to familiarize yourself with in order to choose the best match for you. The Mten3 might have the most effortless acceleration, but it comes with several great costs. So you need to pick the smallest tire size you can live with.

 

 But looking for a wheel that is best on one aspect only is a bit narrow minded, and may result in a crappy or short lived overall experience. All modern EUCs can accelerate like crazy, and choosing suitable pads and a soft enough riding mode will make any wheel accelerate with a reasonable amount of effort. But a lot of other aspects are simply not available on some wheels.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Camenbert said:

accelerating can be done by leaning or torquing.

Sorry, but no it can’t. I’m not sure if the Center of Gravity is a familiar parameter to you, but it’s basically all the wheel sees. You can’t twist the wheel forward with your CoG on top of the axle, since as soon as you do that the wheel accelerates in front of you and you are no longer on top of the axle and the wheel will brake (or reverse).

 You can confirm this by stopping in front of stairs that go up. If you only twist the wheel with your CoG on top of the axle, you’ll fall backwards (the wheel will reverse) right away. The only way to keep the wheel accelerating is to have your CoG in front of the wheel’s axle.

The reason the lean and the twist feel so different is only in the amount of support and control you have.

Quote

If you lean in sand, you'll "face plan" (well at 5 kph) before to you got enough power to overcome the increased resistance of soft sand.

What you have to do instead is to keep centered your gravity and constant speed (slower, easier), but twist the wheel forward, to push a lot more of power against that resistance of soft sand.

Since the only way for the wheel to sense your movements is the tilt of the pedals (and shell), how does the wheel know which method you are using at any given time?

Quote

you can twist forward hardly your wheel, then lean to keep the balance, as a reaction.

You make it sound like you would order the wheel to accelerate by twisting the wheel, and then lean forward to stay on with the accelerating wheel. In reality it’s the other way around. The wheel is the one doing all balancing front to back. If your CoG doesn’t match the acceleration, the wheel will adjust the amount of acceleration based on that, not the other way around.

 If you want to test the amount of balancing you can do by yourself, step on a wheel that’s powered off. Everything else is done by the wheel.

Edited by mrelwood
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Camenbert said:

The V12 free spin is 100 kph, it could have been 78 kph with the 16X wound, not fast enough?
In the other hand, this theoretically gave us a fast accelerating wheel, ~3.0s for this V12 "16X 100V"??

May InMotion give the High Torque/High Speed choice as Gotway?
As seen with them, HT run cooler and have a better range. Bonus.

I think Camenbert has a good point here. Doesn't it seem like an odd design choice for a 16" wheel to be pushed in the direction of speed instead of torque? 

A smaller wheel has inherent advantages for acceleration/torque along with the mentioned benefits of cooler running and better range. I was under the impression most people would only feel comfortable at 40+ mph on an 18" or bigger wheel because of the additional stability a bigger wheel provides. On the current small 14" wheel I have, the MCM5, there are plenty of comments on 28+ mph being MORE than fast enough.

Wouldn't the V12 find it's niche better as a super snappy well built medium size wheel with solid range instead of going for outright speed where it really can't compete?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, mrelwood said:

The point was not so much to bash the amount of peer revieweable scientific content of Adam’s acceleration tests, but to explain that his acceleration times have exactly zero relevance to what you’re after.

 Firstly, do you want to achieve the absolutely fastest acceleration by any means necessary, or do you want the acceleration to be effortless so that a smaller lean would cause a faster acceleration? Because they come from different parameters of the wheel. So you may need to think it through more closely than just “maxing out the acceleration”.

 If you want to accelerate as fast as possible by any means necessary, you need pads that make you feel secure while leaning forward like crazy on an EUC that has huge amounts of absolute power, the kind that the MSP and EX.N are famous for. But accelerating like that takes a lot of effort.

 If you want the most effortless acceleration, you need a small tire diameter. Simple as that. The riding mode affects this as well, so be sure to stay away from the hardest riding modes. Inmotion has the best adjustability, but every manufacturer has a signature feel that you need to familiarize yourself with in order to choose the best match for you. The Mten3 might have the most effortless acceleration, but it comes with several great costs. So you need to pick the smallest tire size you can live with.

 

 But looking for a wheel that is best on one aspect only is a bit narrow minded, and may result in a crappy or short lived overall experience. All modern EUCs can accelerate like crazy, and choosing suitable pads and a soft enough riding mode will make any wheel accelerate with a reasonable amount of effort. But a lot of other aspects are simply not available on some wheels.

Not sure there is any real disagreement here ....... I think you might be debating a view I never expressed. Actually, hadn't intended to express any personal view or wholistic appraisal at all. I hoped only to shed some light on a narrow question with a relevant albeit limited comparison from Adam's videos since I happen to have just sought the info out of curiosity. I had no intention to assert what wheel was "best" outside the scope of that narrow question, or even that those data points served as any definitive evidence within the narrow question. If you want to know what wheel I think is best? Well, I will most likely vote with my wallet. See the V12 as a huge upgrade over my 16x for a whole variety of reasons.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Averian said:

Doesn't it seem like an odd design choice for a 16" wheel to be pushed in the direction of speed instead of torque?

  1. Speed sells.
  2. You can always force more torque out of a wheel, by going "YOLO just use more battery power lol". But you can't force more speed out of a wheel, the motor is wound for a top speed and that's it.
    So you can always change the firmware to give more torque at the expense of efficiency/range, but you can't increase the designed speed after the fact.

I'm not saying I'm liking it, but these are two arguments why manufacturers might in doubt design for speed. I personally would love a super torquey wheel with a big enough tire (like the V12's 16x3) to be comfortable and stable offroad.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, mrelwood said:

 You can’t twist the wheel forward with your CoG on top of the axle

Sorry to see you dont get the point. Now it's not the subject here so I stop.
We can continue later if you have try in soft sand. It's obvious there.

Edited by Camenbert
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pkinpdx said:

Update from Ewheels on V12 preorders:  Cost is $2199 and first shipment should be in the US in 5-6 weeks (so end of june).

Source? (Not doubting you, just it seems they haven't updated their website to reflect this yet.) Email/phone call?

Edit: awesome, thx.

Edited by AtlasP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AtlasP said:

Source? (Not doubting you, just it seems they haven't updated their website to reflect this yet.) Email/phone call?

It went out to people who pre ordered.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow that's cheaper than Ali pricing by a decent amount! KingLocksong has a few things to learn from IM on distribution & IM don't even need to blame their domestic dealers nor come up with the dumbiest of dumdums 'we'll turn your wheels into giant paperweights' strategy.

Good for Ewheels!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Mike Sacristan said:

My EXN has a free spin speed of 95.x kmh..

My buds in the far east free spun the RS, Sherm, EX.N & even the Mpro. His EX.N spins to ~105kph. I wonder why there such a discrepancy to yours Mike. FWIW he too loves his EX.N perhaps as much or even more than his Sherm.

Free spin tests on EX.N is at 10.24

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Scottie888 said:

My buds in the far east free spun the RS, Sherm, EX.N & even the Mpro. His EX.N spins to ~105kph. I wonder why there such a discrepancy to yours Mike. FWIW he too loves his EX.N perhaps as much or even more than his Sherm.

Free spin tests on EX.N is at 10.24

 

Pre-production EXN had ~105kmh free spin.
Early production has ~95kmh.
Later versions  are back to ~105... I wonder if his came with the black board (judging by dat of clip definitely not).
However... I am more than happy with my EXN and I suspect that if it did go faster I would end up losing some low end grunt.
As it is now it is a stupidly fast MSX and a great do it all wheel. Now I just have to learn to jump to backside 180 on it.

It is quite well known amongst the EXN nerds that the speed ended up at 95kmh upon production.

Edited by Mike Sacristan
added text
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mike Sacristan said:

Pre-production EXN had ~105kmh free spin.
Early production has ~95kmh.
Later versions  are back to ~105... I wonder if his came with the black board.
However... I am more than happy with my EXN and I suspect that if it did go faster I would end up losing some low end grunt.
As it is now it is a stupidly fast MSX and a great do it all wheel. Now I just have to learn to jump to backside 180 on it.

Awesome, thanks for the clarification Mike. Gerald has a dude in his crew weighing 120kg that has hit 82kph on the EX.N. Stupid fast is correct & I'm liking the reference to MSX handling. I'm deeply pondering on gettin an EX.N myself. Just hummin & hawin whether GW has the bearings issue handled as yet.

Anyhoos pardon my distraction. Now back to scheduled programming on the V12 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GPW said:

Not sure there is any real disagreement here ....... I think you might be debating a view I never expressed.

Ah, I’m sorry I misunderstood! It’s sometimes too easy to see a familiar debate even when there is none...

 

Quote

See the V12 as a huge upgrade over my 16x for a whole variety of reasons.     

Absolutely, I would too!

Edited by mrelwood
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...