Inmotion V14 Adventure: a new trail wheel from Inmotion

[Planemo]

13 minutes ago, Punxatawneyjoe said:

Yes the robot movement is still "mostly" vertical  however, it does have a slight arc. 

Agreed, that 'slight arc' from a leading link or trailing arm system would help a bit, but I'm far from convinced that any improvement in kinematics would warrant the extra complexity, weight and bulk in a package as compact as an EUC. Maybe one day, given EUC's are getting bigger by the week...

[InfiniteWheelie]

The fork type suspension has so many benefits, I'm convinced it's going to win out. These are some of the benefits off the top of my head.

- Almost completely hidden away from dirt, and damage from crashes.
- More compact overall and less parts (though potentially wider).
- No janky sliding mechanism, it can be made extremely ridged and reliable.
- Happens to be roughly the same width as a typical battery pack, so it's a perfect use of space.
- If using air forks, suspension can be totally disabled/lowered without changing parts (good for learning).
- More aesthetically pleasing.

Edited August 5, 2023 by InfiniteWheelie

[techyiam]

31 minutes ago, Rollin-on-1 said:

I'm not sure I am visualizing the arrangement you are describing, but perhaps.

 

[ABNormal]

On 8/3/2023 at 2:29 PM, Unventor said:

That is not entirely correct. Kingsong did copy it and got sued. Due to cought order the had to pay a fine and forced to build a different design for the S18. This was rushed to market and first customers felt that.

I have not heard any of this, where can i find details about it? Strange as the S18 suspension is so radically different (and superor) to the V11

[Punxatawneyjoe]

2 hours ago, Planemo said:

but I'm far from convinced that any improvement in kinematics would warrant the extra complexity, weight and bulk in a package as compact as an EUC

That's a fair and reasonable statement, I think it could be done using an aircraft aluminum control arm and lightweight air/oil shocks like the v13 has. IMO it wouldn't be as complex as the linkage/slider system some manufacturers are using currently. A simple control arm with a pivot point. I am no engineer so maybe I'm missing something as well as being fairly new to the EUC scene. But i have always been mechanically inclined and feel like the best suspension wins the EUC wars. That's why i think the Sherman S is so popular with a lot of different riders even though it's a heavy wheel.

[Rollin-on-1]

12 hours ago, techyiam said:

 

Wouldn't it perform better with the pivot point in the front?

[techyiam]

40 minutes ago, Rollin-on-1 said:

Wouldn't it perform better with the pivot point in the front?

Perhaps, in theory. I can't say, since I have no experience in this regard. 

But many motorcycle swingarm-based front suspensions are like that.

 

[mrelwood]

4 hours ago, Rollin-on-1 said:

Wouldn't it perform better with the pivot point in the front?

Exactly and absolutely! A steep bump won’t engage the suspension properly in a design like this. Pivot at the front though would transfer the forces perfectly into the swing arm and the shock in every bump and dip.

[Finn Bjerke]

Dear Inmotion please dont screw up again. A new type of suspension for off roading is probably difficult.

V10F: Too slow. Underengineering
V11: Bad bearings
V12hs: Board problems
V13: Range problem, overpriced. Overengineering. Display needs extra waterproofing (WTF?)
V14 ????

V11F ?  
V13F ?

You have a new CEO I gather. 

Note to self: Dont bloody buy batch 1 ever again. 
Note to self: Inmotion are better than the rest
Note to self: My V11 is not too  slow, just because V13 is superfast on the road.
Note to self; Kingsong are lying, Begode are exploding stay with Inmotion and Sherman wheels.  Inmotion admits it if and if they dont make a good batch 1.

Edited August 6, 2023 by Finn Bjerke

[Robse]

17 minutes ago, Finn Bjerke said:

Dear Inmotion please dont screw up again.
Note to self: Inmotion are better than the rest; Kingsong are lying, Begode are exploding

hey 😉 please explain how this

" V10F: Too slow. Underengineering
V11: Bad bearings
V12hs: Board problems
V13: Range problem, overpriced. Overengineering. Display needs extra waterproofing (WTF?)"

applies to this:

" Note to self: Inmotion are better than the rest; Kingsong are lying, Begode are exploding "

😁

[Finn Bjerke]

Thx for your kind reply

The other producers are worse, they lie and they dont compensate you for their errors. China wants to dominate the marked for electric cars - EUCs are part of that strategy, how on earth can EUC producers still make so many SNAFUs?  Its not an overly complicated device ..... My V13 dont charge properly at times.... Other V13 owners have that error, Inmotion have tried to do something. Begode and Kingsong dont care about their errors.  They just make never and more expensive wheels.

My message is: NO MORE STUPID ERRORS INMOTION. PLEASE.  I remember a firmware upgrade on v11 3 years ago or something.  -- the wheel was fucked up for one day, kneeling.  Tis a laff.

NEW WHEEL, NEW DESIGN.... new stupid inmotion errors? We will C. Dont buy batch 1


Jegerpissetrætafatminemangehjulfuckerupogskalfixesheletiden.

[UniVehje]

22 hours ago, InfiniteWheelie said:

The fork type suspension has so many benefits, I'm convinced it's going to win out. These are some of the benefits off the top of my head.

- Almost completely hidden away from dirt, and damage from crashes.
- More compact overall and less parts (though potentially wider).
- No janky sliding mechanism, it can be made extremely ridged and reliable.
- Happens to be roughly the same width as a typical battery pack, so it's a perfect use of space.
- If using air forks, suspension can be totally disabled/lowered without changing parts (good for learning).
- More aesthetically pleasing.

I completely agree with this. You need the sliders anyway. Why not include the shock in the same mechanism. 
Some will argue about travel length but that matters mainly for serious competitive off-roading and big jumps. Most people don’t do those.
 

It’s good to have different mechanisms available for different needs. But I worry that the manufacturers look too much into this forum and some influencers. A normal rider needs to have a comfortable and reliable suspension that is easy to maintain. Stairs are for YouTube. And who does large (>0.5m) drops when commuting? Jumping can be done only in specific areas. For majority of use cases large suspension travel is not needed and comes with costs (needs linkages that take space, pedals too high etc.) But it looks like this travel length is one of the numbers on spec sheets that determine if the suspension is either the best or shit (maybe the best suspension we have gets often criticised for short travel). And that’s how we will all end up riding high with high maintenance linkage suspensions. 

[Robse]

1 hour ago, Finn Bjerke said:

The other producers are worse, they lie and they dont compensate you for their errors.

 

China wants to dominate the marked for electric cars - EUCs are part of that strategy, how on earth can EUC producers still make so many SNAFUs? 


Jegerpissetrætafatminemangehjulfuckerupogskalfixesheletiden.

well dont agree on that, just name one single EUC manufactured in the last 6 years without stupid design errors... can't think of one.

 

of course they want to do dominate. and this works very well since fun and thrill seeking idiots like me keeps buying the sh*t.🙄

[bpong]

1 hour ago, Finn Bjerke said:

...
My message is: NO MORE STUPID ERRORS INMOTION. PLEASE.  I remember a firmware upgrade on v11 3 years ago or something.  -- the wheel was fucked up for one day, kneeling.  Tis a laff.

NEW WHEEL, NEW DESIGN.... new stupid inmotion errors? We will C. Dont buy batch 1


Jegerpissetrætafatminemangehjulfuckerupogskalfixesheletiden.

finn, your recommendation to not buy the batch 1 eucs is lost on all Patton, EX30, T4 etc 1st batch owners for this year.  probably lost on guys like me waiting to spend money.

you are definitely 100% correct in advising not to purchase a batch 1 euc.  i think we all know that.  BUT,...

its just too difficult to ignore all the reviewer videos,  and associated social media.  im currently waiting to see what inmotion has in store for the mid-august release date.  so i haven't spent a cent as yet.  in some ways thats a good thing,  but i cant guarantee that i will not purchase a batch 1 euc, even though that bit of wisdom is staring all of us in the face.  as for wanting to dominate in business,  i think if a country has the manufacturing means plus an ample supply of skilled/unskilled labor,  why not ?

the euc is not recognized as an official means of transportation.  so it doesnt have any manufacturing standards that it has to adhere to.  so any euc is at the mercy of the quality control (if any) of the manufacturer.  as of lately,  a gazillion under torqued allen head fasteners,  under torqued motor mounting bolts, etc,... and we ignore this and  purchase the euc any ways.  WHY ???

we love to ride these things, plain and simple.  we love to work on these things, solve the squeaking suspension noises, experiment with different tires, exchange rants and accolades on euc forums,  create a small specialized pev community and wonder whats coming next down the line...

YOU ARE CORRECT about advising against purchasing a batch 1 euc.  but you cant change the reason why we like riding the euc and the manufacturers know that.  i just hope (as you have declared in your previous posting) the manufactures build better eucs based on rider feedback and rider input.

[Punxatawneyjoe]

4 hours ago, Robse said:

Display needs extra waterproofing

yeah?

 

[Finn Bjerke]

Splendid and brave demonstration...... Ill travel in bad weather tomorrow because of your video mate. Appreciated.  Why did Inmotion show us how to cover display and power button with plastic ??

[InfiniteWheelie]

9 hours ago, UniVehje said:

I completely agree with this. You need the sliders anyway. Why not include the shock in the same mechanism. 
Some will argue about travel length but that matters mainly for serious competitive off-roading and big jumps. Most people don’t do those.
 

It’s good to have different mechanisms available for different needs. But I worry that the manufacturers look too much into this forum and some influencers. A normal rider needs to have a comfortable and reliable suspension that is easy to maintain. Stairs are for YouTube. And who does large (>0.5m) drops when commuting? Jumping can be done only in specific areas. For majority of use cases large suspension travel is not needed and comes with costs (needs linkages that take space, pedals too high etc.) But it looks like this travel length is one of the numbers on spec sheets that determine if the suspension is either the best or shit (maybe the best suspension we have gets often criticised for short travel). And that’s how we will all end up riding high with high maintenance linkage suspensions. 

I just came across this image which compares the dimensions and travel of different wheels. They're all between 80-100mm, except for the S22 which has 130mm. The Sherman S is right among the average with 90mm. So linkage and forks already have basically the same travel, except the S22...

Even with the S22, I don't see how the linkage makes a difference in travel. The slider still needs to move 130mm. Like you said, they can simply make that slider into a fork leg. The height of the wheel shouldn't change.

What is the real physical limit of suspension travel? It's the distance from the pedals to the top of the wheel. This is because the upside down "V" your legs form begins to narrow much faster once above the knees. So wheels must be roughly no taller than the average person's knees when mounted (or the wheel must narrow significantly towards the top).

This means travel distance doesn't come down to linkage vs forks, it's between small vs large diameter wheels. Say you start with a big 22" wheel with 100mm of travel. You then design a smaller 16" wheel with the same total height. Now the suspension can compress much lower before hitting the smaller tire (longer travel).

Assuming I worked that out correctly in my head, smaller wheels allow longer suspension travel. Smaller and lighter wheels are also naturally better for off-roading which involves slow speed maneuvers and jumps. On the other hand larger and heavier wheels are better on road because of their speed, stability, and ability to roll over potholes. I think we'll see a clear divide in high performance wheels between small off-road wheels (with high travel), and large road wheels (with slightly less travel). However it seems to me that forks are the superior choice for both off-road and road wheels. I'm not certain on this subject so if I got something wrong please point it out.

 

 

 

Edited August 6, 2023 by InfiniteWheelie

[mrelwood]

1 hour ago, InfiniteWheelie said:

This means travel distance doesn't come down to linkage vs forks, it's between small vs large diameter wheels. Say you start with a big 22" wheel with 100mm of travel. You then design a smaller 16" wheel with the same total height. Now the suspension can compress much lower before hitting the smaller tire (longer travel).

There are a few things that limit the travel still though. A small tire diameter wheel needs to have it’s pedals lower for the geometry to work similarly. The ratio between the axle to pedals and pedals to ground needs to be reasonable, which lowers the overall pedal height. And you can’t have 15cm of suspension travel if the pedals are 18cm off the ground by default.

 Besides, the wheel’s balance distribution would probably be top heavy if the tire needs a lot more  room to travel into the wheel.

ShermS vs Patton is a good comparison. The smaller travel on the Patton needed for them to make a new model of the shocks, which I’m sure they tried to avoid. Maybe they needed to get the riding height lower for it to ride well, and the only solution was to cut 2cm off the shock’s travel.

[Punxatawneyjoe]

6 hours ago, Finn Bjerke said:

  Why did Inmotion show us how to cover display and power button with plastic

@Forwardnbak had an issue in the rain after touching the screen when it's wet. Apparently if it's touched or "activated" when it's wet i can change settings with droplets of water. He notified inmotion of this and their solution was the screen cover/protector. I tested it right after because i had ridden in the rain several times before and never had this issue, so we came to the conclusion that if you mess with the settings when its wet, it may make a difference. I wouldn't worry about water intrusion though. I disassembled the top shortly after to see if any water had gotten into the wheel that way and found it to be completely dry. There is a gasket at the base of the screen that keeps it out.

[InfiniteWheelie]

10 hours ago, mrelwood said:

There are a few things that limit the travel still though. A small tire diameter wheel needs to have it’s pedals lower for the geometry to work similarly. The ratio between the axle to pedals and pedals to ground needs to be reasonable, which lowers the overall pedal height. And you can’t have 15cm of suspension travel if the pedals are 18cm off the ground by default.

 Besides, the wheel’s balance distribution would probably be top heavy if the tire needs a lot more  room to travel into the wheel.

ShermS vs Patton is a good comparison. The smaller travel on the Patton needed for them to make a new model of the shocks, which I’m sure they tried to avoid. Maybe they needed to get the riding height lower for it to ride well, and the only solution was to cut 2cm off the shock’s travel.

So the fully compressed pedal height is roughly constant across all wheels (including non-suspension models). You want the pedals as low as possible for handling and acceleration/braking purposes, but they must be high enough to avoid the pedals catching on bumps and scraping on turns. Assuming the compressed pedal height is basically constant across all wheels...

Starting with a non-suspension wheel, every millimeter of travel you add increases the uncompressed pedal height by 1mm. This is bad for handling, and the smaller the wheel the worse it is (due to the lower axle). As you mentioned it seems that this effect is so pronounced that Leaperkim actually had to reduce the travel on the Patton vs the Sherman S for this reason.

Now that I think about it, on a non-suspension wheel if the distance from the pedal to the top of the wheel is already small enough that it doesn't go above your knees, it wouldn't matter how much travel you added (the shell moves with the pedals). So there is a limit on how big a wheel can be before it goes past your knees (forcing you to spread your feet which is bad), but it's not related to suspension at all.

So there seems to be 2 main factors that limit suspension travel:
1. The uncompressed pedal height to axle ratio (limited by bad handling characteristics)
2. The compressed pedal height (limited by ground clearance issues)

This seems to suggest that larger diameter wheels are actually the ones capable of higher travel. They have higher axles which mean you can add more travel before the handling goes to shit. A wheel can only be so big before it goes past your knees, and something like the 22" Abrams is already approaching this limit. So for a road wheel the ideal would be something around 22", with the most travel you can add before ruining the handling. And for off-road wheels it's a fight between making it small and light enough to jump and whip around the trails, at the expensive of less travel or bad handling characteristics. Since the travel is limited in either application, it seems progressive suspension is really important.

Edited August 7, 2023 by InfiniteWheelie

[Rollin-on-1]

12 hours ago, InfiniteWheelie said:

forcing you to spread your feet which is bad)

A design forcing a rider to ride in a way that is uncomfortable is bad, But a wider stance itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Some, including myself, prefer a wider stance.  If you look at any traditional sport where the athelete needs to quickly change direction, you will see them using a wide stance with their knees bent, hips back, chest forward, and arms above their hips.  Taking a similar athletic stance on an EUC lends itself to an active, aggressive riding style.

[onewheelkoregro]

47 minutes ago, Rollin-on-1 said:

A design forcing a rider to ride in a way that is uncomfortable is bad, But a wider stance itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Some, including myself, prefer a wider stance.  If you look at any traditional sport where the athelete needs to quickly change direction, you will see them using a wide stance with their knees bent, hips back, chest forward, and arms above their hips.  Taking a similar athletic stance on an EUC lends itself to an active, aggressive riding style.

As I was learning my mind was comforted by the constant contact of the EUC on my inner calves. But as I got more advanced and started going faster (60kmh consistently) I prefer a "looser" stance so I can keep my knees bent after almost getting thrown at those speeds because I was too tight on the unicycle. Stance plays a big part in how you ride.

[mrelwood]

2 hours ago, Rollin-on-1 said:

If you look at any traditional sport where the athelete needs to quickly change direction

I don't think that's a good comparison. We don't change direction as we ride. We stand still. The downforce we experience is always towards the pedals. Bicyclists for example don't need a wider stance to be more stable as they turn. No matter how aggressively they ride or race.

[eezo]

40 minutes ago, mrelwood said:

I don't think that's a good comparison. We don't change direction as we ride. We stand still. The downforce we experience is always towards the pedals. Bicyclists for example don't need a wider stance to be more stable as they turn. No matter how aggressively they ride or race.

I think it's helpful to compare and contrast versus a motorcycle rider leaning in a corner.

A motorcycle rider or cyclist has the ability to grip the vehicle with their hands and upper legs. This allows them to lean further while still keeping their body from simply falling over. A motorcycle rider with that kind of lean isn't being held on the bike (entirely) by g forces around the corner, they're clinging onto the bike and its gyroscopic stability.

An EUC rider can't lean that far to the inside when cornering. If your feet are closer together, this further limits your lean angle. If your feet are further apart on the pedals, you can lean further while staying balanced. All in all wide vs narrow stance isn't the most critical thing when riding an EUC, but it absolutely does help cornering stability.

[mrelwood]

7 minutes ago, eezo said:

A motorcycle rider with that kind of lean isn't being held on the bike (entirely) by g forces around the corner, they're clinging onto the bike and its gyroscopic stability.

I'm not sure if that's true. Or especially how that part translates to EUCs. I don't think you can cling on to a wider riding stance any better than you can on a narrow one. But there may be riding habits and situations that I havent experienced that might benefit from a wide stance for other reasons.

7 minutes ago, eezo said:

If your feet are closer together, this further limits your lean angle.

It's actually the other way around. Wide pedals get closer to the ground much sooner, limiting your lean angle.

Cornering stability is another matter though, and I can see how wider pedals can stabilize the wheel against shakiness.

Edited August 7, 2023 by mrelwood