Jump to content

Unicycle reliability stats - link provided


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Chriull said:

Would be interesting how the "based on the returns processed by our after-sales service" is meant in detail...

Especially a breakdown of the return issues/reasons could be extremely interesting (firmware, user faults, wiring, axle, burned mb,...)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, em1barns said:

While they don't provide methodology for the reliability rating (but they do for comfort rating), I don't see an obvious sign of bias. They are direct importer of Gotway (they aren't resellers of Gotway France importer), so Gotway machines are their most expensive and highest margin ones. Yet, they appear as good last.

Likewise, for Inmotion wheels, they are resellers of Inmotion France importer, so this is their least margin wheels, another sign that bias is at best limited. These guys are also very knowledgeable, have been in the business for a while, and have French community respect. So without knowing them, please keep your "BS" and be constructive. It is very difficult to get a good reliability index, as you then have to categorize failures: a LED failing should not be treated as a PCB failure that cuts the engine Showing some form of transparency is something we should applaud rather than make joke of....

The other source of confusion that any vendor would have a hard time to avoid is that construction and parts for the same model can vary over time for a given wheel, think about MSuper3 and Kingsong 16b, where the makers had several versions of the same model to correct previously undetected issues. But this is the maker's fault, not the reseller.

OK, sorry, let me elaborate on the "BS".  The rating is their limit experience with the wheels.  It is their opinion, not scientific, no details, hence BS. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, eddiemoy said:

OK, sorry, let me elaborate on the "BS".  The rating is their limit experience with the wheels.  It is their opinion, not scientific, no details, hence BS. 

Beside the BS that is quite exactly what they state in regard to the statistic on their website - they never tried to sell this as a scientific or profound study - just their opinion/experience. Imho their opinion and experience is at least a little bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the reliability rating is based on the total number or service requests or a percentage... if it is based on the total number of each model they have had to service then the most popular brands would appear as the least reliable. This would explain the ninebot rating since E+ is the oldest and probably outnumbers the other wheels by sheer volume. They probably had to work on the most E+ units but if it doesn't scale with the total number of units owned/sold then it is not a very useful metric.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/08/2017 at 2:22 PM, eddiemoy said:

OK, sorry, let me elaborate on the "BS".  The rating is their limit experience with the wheels.  It is their opinion, not scientific, no details, hence BS. 

Just because they only process their own data that doesn't mean it is not scientific. That is, in fact, what most scientists do: process and analyse their own data. Even if it is not "scientific" (whatever this means besides being open and honest, and I should know as I am a scientist) and doesn't provide details as well, that still doesn't mean it is BS. I also would prefer (and highly appreciate) if they would give the details how they come up with their scores from 1-9.

Edited by Mono
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, electricpen said:

I wonder if the reliability rating is based on the total number or service requests or a percentage

I don't think the urban360 guys are that naive. And I don't think they could even run a business of that size successfully, if you hadn't understood the irrelevance of absolute numbers in this case. As always, I could be wrong :smartass:

Edited by Mono
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, em1barns said:

what makes me worried is that the newest the model for Gotway, the less reliable it gets

that's kind-of old news though

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link. The range chart is very accurate as far as I can tell. Now I want a Monster for those 120km...:wub:

Speeds look more realistic than some other claims too.

Not sure about an arbitrary reliability point rating without further explanation. And it's clearly influenced by the Gotway oscillation recall/repairs (msuper V3 so low) which was an outlier as far as current considerations of wheels are concerned. Also, who cares about their overall "we had to repair something" rates? Errors that lead to a cut-out/crash are the important thing (as they initially mention)!

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, houseofjob said:

Out of the 13 wheels listed on the reliability chart, I've owned or own 5, and including our NYC regular group owners, that brings the total up to 8. By far, both the Ninebot One E+ (during the bad firmware period) and the Gotway 84V series (MSuperV3/ACM) are the wheels with most incident/issues, across years.

And since these issues are fixed (firmware for both manufacturers), the ranking is misleading for anyone buying a new wheel now, if it's based on their cumulative experience instead of judging the current latest iteration of each wheel:) It does not look like they removed the Ninebot and Gotway firmware failures from the data...

Edited by meepmeepmayer
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, houseofjob said:

Mind you, it looks like they're taking things all the way back to as far as 2012, which means, for a long history'd wheel like the Ninebot One E+, this includes that period a year to 2 years back, where bad/premature firmware rollouts were dropping NB1E+ riders like flies (newbies, just search these forums).

 

Even though the failures of the Ninebot firmwares a couple years ago, and the more recent Gotway firmware failures and the Kingsong axle failures look bad on the surface, at least it shows that they are continually trying to improve their product. (except Ninebot seems to be going to a smaller, safer 14 inch wheel and focusing more on the two wheel Segway type devices) Especially Kingsong and Gotway, with new and improved shell designs and more advanced features, makes me feel good about the future.

Speaking of the future, has anyone got any information on Segway day?  August 12th.  It was showing on the app today.  http:bbs.ninebot.cn/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Like others, I would not take these results as facts, there are too many variables from a rider to another, from an EUC to another.

I've juste noticed something, it seems like with these results, the most reliable EUC are slow to moderate speeders, and high speed EUC seems to be the ones with the most reliability issues. Maybe this is simply linked to speed, because these EUC can go faster, EUC riders will ride them faster therefore all the components are much more solicited. My guess is that if everyone used the HS EUC at speeds of max 20kph like other EUC, then the results would be different.

The Gotway issues seem to be mainly linked to speed (except for the oscillation issue, but they aren't the only ones to have firmware issues) as the most reliable Gotway are also the slowest, maybe also because Gotway riders treat there Gotways in a rougher way (juste guessing). It is very difficult to conclude anything about reliability because not a single EUC rider rides the same way :D

From my personal experience, gotways EUCs  (mcm4, mcm3, mcm2s, ACM, Monster) are 100% reliable, never a single issue for now.

Edited by Pingouin
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, meepmeepmayer said:

And since these issues are fixed (firmware for both manufacturers), the ranking is misleading for anyone buying a new wheel now, if it's based on their cumulative experience instead of judging the current latest iteration of each wheel:) It does not look like they removed the Ninebot and Gotway firmware failures from the data...

If you look at the date of their post, it was in April 2017. So this was before the Gotway oscillating firmware issue....

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Pingouin said:

Hi,

Like others, I would not take these results as facts, there are too many variables from a rider to another, from an EUC to another.

I've juste noticed something, it seems like with these results, the most reliable EUC are slow to moderate speeders, and high speed EUC seems to be the ones with the most reliability issues. Maybe this is simply linked to speed, because these EUC can go faster, EUC riders will ride them faster therefore all the components are much more solicited. My guess is that if everyone used the HS EUC at speeds of max 20kph like other EUC, then the results would be different.

The Gotway issues seem to be mainly linked to speed (except for the oscillation issue, but they aren't the only ones to have firmware issues) as the most reliable Gotway are also the slowest, maybe also because Gotway riders treat there Gotways in a rougher way (juste guessing). It is very difficult to conclude anything about reliability because not a single EUC rider rides the same way :D

From my personal experience, gotways EUCs  (mcm4, mcm3, mcm2s, ACM, Monster) are 100% reliable, never a single issue for now.

Since Gotway moved to 1500w engines, they showed their lack of engineering skills to adapt the construction and wiring to the challenges of these bigger engines.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/08/2017 at 0:30 AM, meepmeepmayer said:

since these issues are fixed (firmware for both manufacturers), the ranking is misleading for anyone buying a new wheel now

Though one point of this kind of data is to judge reliability of manufacturers, to build reputation scores for brands. If a factory has come out with a crap model in the past, why would I trust them to sell an awesomely reliable model in future without to have checked very very carefully? The people who came up with the crap model usually haven't changed after all. They are likely to continue to make wrong or reckless decision unless they come under great pressure to force changes...

Link to post
Share on other sites

This statistical thinking may work for car manufacturers who churn out dozens of models each year. But for such a tiny market like EUCs, not sure if it says much. Also, specifically here standard "repairs" aren't that important, what really counts is cut-outs from hardware failure (and other instant crash hardware failures). These above all else must never happen. Whether a wheel is more or less likely to develop some minor (non-crash) issue is secondary (to me, at least) - given how simple EUCs are and how rare dead LEDs, scratching tires or whatever are - who cares.

In the end, if a given model is confirmed good, that's mostly all that counts (to me;)). Even from a bad manufacturer. And if we judge manufacturers by questionable and outright brain-dead decisions, there's nobody left (but you're right, if there were a similar model from Kingsong and Gotway, nobody would ever buy the GW - there are distinctions).

Link to post
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...