Alan B
100 GW
bigoilbob said:"Your small wheeled, light bike presents a reduced load. Losing 1.5 seconds of time during climbing on a steep gradient is a significant loss of powered time. If it hunts then the loss could be 4.5 seconds or more. I recall someone writing that autoshifting was so slow and late that it was not useful."
You have not presented any examples from your experience of autoshifting being necessary or important. Are there any you wish to share?"
* My "small wheeled bike" is actually heavy, and carries 2 riders And because of the way gravity works, loss of speed during shifting is not dependent on weight anyhow. Also in practice, you can not downshift a Xiongda manually any faster than it downshifts automatically. Please point me to the page of any poster who says otherwise - the elusive "someone".
* "Hunting" is the repeated downshift, speed up, upshift, failure to maintain speed upon upshift, and then resultant repeat of the downshift. It has NOTHING to do with "4.5 seconds or more" of delay.
* The advantages of autoshifting are intuitively obvious. One less thing for the rider to think about. Improved motor life from shifting that is programmed to reduce motor shock and to keep the motor in it's best range. I actually prefer manual shifting cars, trucks, motorcycles, but like the fact that my wife can exploit 2 speed bicycle motor operation without having to think about which gear she is in. If you don't like autoshift, that; your preference. But I have yet to see any posts pointing out any problems with autoshift that would be reduced/solved without it being available. Please point out the thread page of any such posts...
When climbing the duration of the shifting time affects the amount of speed lost.
Hunting causes even greater loss of (time) useful work (integrated torque) and greater loss of momentum and velocity on gradients.
Many have noted it shifts too late on uphill gradients (which is about the only time I would use low gear), and that we know is a "normal" response of a transmission's control system. Unlike a rider with eyes who has lookahead capability the transmission needs to lug down before it shifts so it has already wasted time and is starting late, especially with such a slow shifting process. The optimal time to shift is before the motor lugs and loses speed. Manual and automatic shifting both use the same shifting algorithm, however automatic shifting is reactionary where a rider's shifting can be better timed with experience, anticipating the increased load. Since shifting causes clutch wear reduced shifting increases motor clutch life. On gradients where high gear is adequate there is no need to use low speed at all. It is only needed on steep gradients, and then there is no need to shift until the gradient falls below the required threshold. Shifting more just causes unnecessary wear. If you look at the modeling, in cases that low gear is required, there is no speed at which high gear has adequate torque. So it is not like an ICE where shifting allows it to speed up and then changing gears allows it to continue to accelerate. With the torque curve of an electric it can either start in high gear or not. If it can't start in high gear it can't operate in high gear at any speed - it needs to start in low gear and stay there. It is a "range" selection, not a gearshift. There are many ES threads on shifting and gearing for electric motors, the Xiongda follows the same physical principles.
Compared to a 29" wheel a 16" wheel decreases torque load on the motor by the ratio 29/16 or 1.8125 which is a large reduction, nearly the reduction of low range on a 4WD vehicle (and almost as much reduction as the range shifting itself).
The disadvantage of autoshifting is that it limits you to a weak controller with low voltage capacity and little capability for adjustment or improvement. I do agree it could be good for an untrained user, or one that won't bother to learn how to best time the shift.
This discussion appears to be going in circles so it is probably best to let it drop.