Leaperkim Sherman L 151V 4000wh 20" 102lbs

[InfiniteWheelie]

4 hours ago, Duster said:

I wonder what it would take, engineering-wise, for a Veteran design with more plastic to be comparable in durability, rigidity, etc. Would there need to be any special internal patterns (triangles and other stuff) to increase structural support, or would that be an opportunity to provide increased support?

Basically all wheels used to use plastic battery cases before suspension came along. The pedal hanger was attached directly to the axle, so the battery cases took no rider weight. So no special materials or designs for the battery cases are needed when they battery cases aren't talking load. I just suggested using engineering plastic because they can take a crash better, maybe similar to metal.

Then with the Sherman S and other fork suspension wheels, they attached the pedals to the bottom of the battery cases instead. This made them a load bearing component which necessitated the switch to metal to take the rider's weight.

I'm suggesting to use a pedal hanger similar to the old style, but attached to the fork instead of the axle (so it can move). Basically the pedal hanger clamps around the fork, and the batteries attach to the pedal hanger. The battery could possibly even use a non-bolt connecting mechanism, allowing for quick release while the pedal hanger stays bolted to the fork.

Edited July 19 by InfiniteWheelie

[Rawnei]

Can we keep this topic about Sherman L and start new topics for discussing alternative materials and alternative designs?

[InfiniteWheelie]

Just now, Rawnei said:

Can we keep this topic about Sherman L and start new topics for discussing alternative materials and alternative designs?

You got it boss. I didn't anticipate making so many posts about it but I was responding to people. I'll make a new thread when I have time later.

[Rawnei]

Cross posting my impressions of the Acceleration Assist feature (for those that don't know they added this feature on the Lynx as well with a firmware update):

 

[Rawnei]

 

[Duster]

Myself being on-topic to the SL, what do we think about the way the handles/bumpers were designed?  Anyone feeling the need for future Grizzla and Nylonove fairings?

From what I see, Leaperkim put way more design into the handles and bumpers into the SL/Lynx/Patton than the Sherman S. If you look at the bumpers for the SS from Grizzla and Nylonove, the SS offerings are way smaller than what you get for wheels like the Master, S22, etc.; the SS bumpers barely wrapped around the body, leaving much to be desired in terms of protection (I think Leaperkim's intent was for the SS's body chamfers to deflect impacts as opposed to having plastic absorb impacts).  Comparatively, the SL now comes stock with handles that double as bumpers in autumn to the front and rear bumpers. This should protect the body more, especially in the case of a slide.

Honestly, if I get the SL in the future, I might keep it as close to stock weight as possible and not change/cover the handles/bumpers. What do y'all think?

[tonto_euc]

1 hour ago, Duster said:

Myself being on-topic to the SL, what do we think about the way the handles/bumpers were designed?  Anyone feeling the need for future Grizzla and Nylonove fairings?

From what I see, Leaperkim put way more design into the handles and bumpers into the SL/Lynx/Patton than the Sherman S. If you look at the bumpers for the SS from Grizzla and Nylonove, the SS offerings are way smaller than what you get for wheels like the Master, S22, etc.; the SS bumpers barely wrapped around the body, leaving much to be desired in terms of protection (I think Leaperkim's intent was for the SS's body chamfers to deflect impacts as opposed to having plastic absorb impacts).  Comparatively, the SL now comes stock with handles that double as bumpers in autumn to the front and rear bumpers. This should protect the body more, especially in the case of a slide.

Honestly, if I get the SL in the future, I might keep it as close to stock weight as possible and not change/cover the handles/bumpers. What do y'all think?

did they change the handle position on the Lynx and SL? on the Patton, it was difficult to charge the wheel in the front. i think with the Lynx and SL, the charge ports are in the rear? if so, then there's no issue with charging?

Edited July 22 by Tan Ho

[Duster]

8 minutes ago, Tan Ho said:

did the change the handle position on the Lynx and SL? on the Patton, it was difficult to charge the wheel in the front. i think with the Lynx and SL, the charge ports are in the rear? if so, then there's no issue with charging?

The handle may be higher, but yeah, both of their charge pets are in the back, unlike the Patton, so the real difficulty is that you can't utilize the kickstand while plugging in the charger.

I suppose that was a reason for Patton owners to swap out their bumpers for Grizzla alternatives. I hadn't thought of that. I'm the past, usually third party bumpers are bought because the stock protection is lackluster. Leaperkim his been putting some substantial front/minimal side protection on their latest wheels, so it almost seems like only intense racing/off-road riders will feel the need for them.

Edited July 22 by Duster
Typo

[Rawnei]

6 hours ago, Tan Ho said:

did they change the handle position on the Lynx and SL? on the Patton, it was difficult to charge the wheel in the front. i think with the Lynx and SL, the charge ports are in the rear? if so, then there's no issue with charging?

Both Lynx and SL have the ports in the back which are more convenient and easier to plug in.

6 hours ago, Duster said:

The handle may be higher, but yeah, both of their charge pets are in the back, unlike the Patton, so the real difficulty is that you can't utilize the kickstand while plugging in the charger.

If you really want to you can, plug it in first then lean it on the kickstand. 😁

[Clem604]

 

[Duster]

40 minutes ago, Rawnei said:

Both Lynx and SL have the ports in the back which are more convenient and easier to plug in.

If you really want to you can, plug it in first then lean it on the kickstand. 😁

It's probably also possible to plug it in while it's on. That way it stands on its own to make the ports readily accessible, and as it auto-shuts off upon plugging in the charger you could set it down on the kickstand.

Come to think of it, if the body panels are symmetrical (something tells me they are, for economical manufacturing purposes), one could mount the kickstand on the front to make the port access even more convenient? (This is both a joke and me brainstorming for fun.)

[Rollin-on-1]

26 minutes ago, Duster said:

Come to think of it, if the body panels are symmetrical (something tells me they are, for economical manufacturing purposes), one could mount the kickstand on the front to make the port access even more convenient?

Bonus - it turns a boring, everyday jump into a front flip! 😁

[Duster]

2 hours ago, Rollin-on-1 said:

Bonus - it turns a boring, everyday jump into a front flip! 😁

"Pro EUC riders hate this one trick!" lmao

Too bad the wheel would likely tilt switch off. Can't stick the landing

[Rollin-on-1]

2 hours ago, Duster said:

Can't stick the landing

Skill issue  😁

[Taras]

[Duster]

13 hours ago, Taras said:

This is so insightful! Reminds me of the TV Show, "How It's Made:" Relaxing to see, and fascinating to see how things go together.

This is my first time seeing a post like this. Are there teardowns like this for the ET Max or any of the recent Commander Wheels?

 

 

I like these photos, as they show Leaperkim's approach to what seems like a minimalist slider design. In the first photo, you see two raised lines to the left of the hole that shows the FastAce spring through the body (I don't remember the Sherman S having this). In the second photo, you see the milled suspension clamp. I remember the older Sherman S used to have a cast top clamp, but they revised it to be milled (my Sherman S needed to get that upgrade, which is how I found out).  I wonder if the same thing will happen to the cast motor mounts that you point out as having worse fitment than the milled third-party upgrades.

Something tells me that the milled top clamp was made because of the minimalist slider mechanism; wouldn't a milled piece of metal hold up to siding against the metal body better than a cast piece? Better yet, it could be nice for the minimalist slider mechanism to slide into a dedicated slider mechanism within the suspension cavity of the shell. Such a system might assuage the rigidity speculations Leaperkim gets. But I can't think of a way that could reliably be done with this design off the top of my head.

[Rawnei]

48 minutes ago, Duster said:

This is so insightful! Reminds me of the TV Show, "How It's Made:" Relaxing to see, and fascinating to see how things go together.

This is my first time seeing a post like this. Are there teardowns like this for the ET Max or any of the recent Commander Wheels?

 

 

I like these photos, as they show Leaperkim's approach to what seems like a minimalist slider design. In the first photo, you see two raised lines to the left of the hole that shows the FastAce spring through the body (I don't remember the Sherman S having this). In the second photo, you see the milled suspension clamp. I remember the older Sherman S used to have a cast top clamp, but they revised it to be milled (my Sherman S needed to get that upgrade, which is how I found out).  I wonder if the same thing will happen to the cast motor mounts that you point out as having worse fitment than the milled third-party upgrades.

Something tells me that the milled top clamp was made because of the minimalist slider mechanism; wouldn't a milled piece of metal hold up to siding against the metal body better than a cast piece? Better yet, it could be nice for the minimalist slider mechanism to slide into a dedicated slider mechanism within the suspension cavity of the shell. Such a system might assuage the rigidity speculations Leaperkim gets. But I can't think of a way that could reliably be done with this design off the top of my head.

There is no "sliding mechanism", the shocks are the "sliders", everything happens inside the shock.

[Duster]

5 minutes ago, Rawnei said:

There is no "sliding mechanism", the shocks are the "sliders", everything happens inside the shock.

I agree, but if we look at the Sheman S in the old Eevees teardown, you can see that there is friction wear from the mounts that bind the suspension to the motor. So, effectively, those ridges in the Sheman L are there to serve as a point on which they want such friction wear to be focused. If so, then we may see less wear on the Sherman L than we see in the Sherman S here:

 

When I call this a "minimalist slider mechanism," I'm referring to how this friction between the motor/suspension mounts and the inner side of the body appears to be an intentional point of friction. Ideally, any point of friction in a moving mechanism would be lubricated. I looked back at the Commander Pro teardown from Eevees, and the same motor/suspension mounts have wheel on them, like the slider mechanism in the S22:

 

 

Taking all this together, it's Leaperkim's choice to omit any kind of secondary slider mechanism within the suspension cavity of the body, going instead with ridges that they desire to take the brunt of the friction. For longevity purposes, I could see myself applying lubrication down there on the Sherman L to test if it makes a difference. Alternatively, I could imagine future Leaperkim wheels adding wheels to their motor/suspension mounts like on the Commander Pro, primarily for the friction reduction and longevity of the body, and secondarily to address the speculation that this is the source of "play."

[GothamMike]

On 7/19/2024 at 11:33 AM, InfiniteWheelie said:

Basically all wheels used to use plastic battery cases before suspension came along. The pedal hanger was attached directly to the axle, so the battery cases took no rider weight. So no special materials or designs for the battery cases are needed when they battery cases aren't talking load. I just suggested using engineering plastic because they can take a crash better, maybe similar to metal.

Then with the Sherman S and other fork suspension wheels, they attached the pedals to the bottom of the battery cases instead. This made them a load bearing component which necessitated the switch to metal to take the rider's weight.

I'm suggesting to use a pedal hanger similar to the old style, but attached to the fork instead of the axle (so it can move). Basically the pedal hanger clamps around the fork, and the batteries attach to the pedal hanger. The battery could possibly even use a non-bolt connecting mechanism, allowing for quick release while the pedal hanger stays bolted to the fork.

A good choice by LK. 

[Rawnei]

43 minutes ago, Duster said:

I agree, but if we look at the Sheman S in the old Eevees teardown, you can see that there is friction wear from the mounts that bind the suspension to the motor. So, effectively, those ridges in the Sheman L are there to serve as a point on which they want such friction wear to be focused. If so, then we may see less wear on the Sherman L than we see in the Sherman S here:

 

When I call this a "minimalist slider mechanism," I'm referring to how this friction between the motor/suspension mounts and the inner side of the body appears to be an intentional point of friction. Ideally, any point of friction in a moving mechanism would be lubricated. I looked back at the Commander Pro teardown from Eevees, and the same motor/suspension mounts have wheel on them, like the slider mechanism in the S22:

 

 

Taking all this together, it's Leaperkim's choice to omit any kind of secondary slider mechanism within the suspension cavity of the body, going instead with ridges that they desire to take the brunt of the friction. For longevity purposes, I could see myself applying lubrication down there on the Sherman L to test if it makes a difference. Alternatively, I could imagine future Leaperkim wheels adding wheels to their motor/suspension mounts like on the Commander Pro, primarily for the friction reduction and longevity of the body, and secondarily to address the speculation that this is the source of "play."

The reason it rubbed was tolerance issues, not something they designed on purpose, their updated designs such as the Lynx don't have this sort of rubbing, with enough space there things don't rub.

[Duster]

48 minutes ago, Rawnei said:

The reason it rubbed was tolerance issues, not something they designed on purpose, their updated designs such as the Lynx don't have this sort of rubbing, with enough space there things don't rub.

Ah, gotcha. On my Sherman S, which was an early batch, it has some of that rubbing (and also has the older axle design, without the cutouts in the center that reduce the strain on motor bolts). I attributed that to some of my wheel's rigidity, and any friction I may have thought to have perceived in the suspension.

I'd be interested in seeing a Commander L teardown, and in getting the chance to test each of their suspension, just to get a feel for how their different approaches feel in smoothness and responsiveness.

[RagingGrandpa]

21 hours ago, Taras said:

Ecodrift's blog post for SL teardown:
https://ecodrift.ru/2024/07/24/veteran-sherman-l-razbiraem/

It's quite an endorsement!

Quote

Conclusions? This is typical Leaperkim quality. The service center technicians have seen all of this in all of the wheels from this manufacturer. You can't say that this is some kind of pre-production marketing sample. It looks like a typical production wheel. The Sherman-L is minimally different from previous models, it is clear that most of the old shortcomings have been taken into account, so I can confidently say that this model will not have any of the first batch problems with a 95% probability. There is simply no room for error here. In essence, this wheel is a slightly larger Veteran Lynx. There are differences in the controller, but they are also more cosmetic.

Same FET design as Lynx, ok.

And nice to see the BMS!

Quote

I wonder what this is about?

Quote

independent engine rewinding has now gained popularity

[padluka]

40 minutes ago, RagingGrandpa said:

I wonder what this is about?

Read the article(in original)
There are custom shops which can change motor winding(rewind) to get different properties from the motor. And it is gaining popularity in EUC community(Russian part of it).

People who are racing just swap Sherman S motor into Lynx. But Sherman S will become discontinued soon, so you can get same effect by rewinding existing motor.

Edited July 24 by padluka

[onkeldanuel]

8 hours ago, padluka said:

Read the article(in original)
There are custom shops which can change motor winding(rewind) to get different properties from the motor. And it is gaining popularity in EUC community(Russian part of it).

People who are racing just swap Sherman S motor into Lynx. But Sherman S will become discontinued soon, so you can get same effect by rewinding existing motor.

Has anyone here also experience with mounting an sherman S-Motor into a lynx for example? Sounds interesting and am courious about the difference to the lynx motor..

[Skampster]

Just put a preorder in with Eriderz, 6-8weeks……………………