Kepler
10 MW
Front mount done. It better be good oatnet 
Oatnet's x5403/Norco A-line, and Front-Mount battery stuff
- Thread starter oatnet
- Start date
waynebergman
100 kW
It looks like the bag is resting and will rub on the frames head tube. If this is the case it will not be a fair test. Also as mentioned earlier in this thread the pack mount can not flop around from side to side but must be firmly secured to get the best performance from this style of mount. Hope you get it free from rubbing on the head tube and mounted in a way that it does not move at all from its fastenings. Good luck.
Kepler
10 MW
It does touch the head tube but there is not much pressure on it. I dont think it will be an issue. The actual mount is very secure. hardly any movement and its only 4kg in total weight anyway. I think it will be fine.
sn0wchyld
100 kW
Kepler said:Front mount done. It better be good oatnet
mmmmm stealthy... im not sure anyone but a seasoned ebiker will ever guess that that's anything but stock. Makes me want to buy a MAC and build a true sleeper. hope it goes well for ya.
Kepler
10 MW
Funny you say that. I get all the waves and nods from the Lycra's when riding this bike. Totally accepted as just a normal bike. Just think I am a kick ass rider. Sad bit is that I am starting to kid myself that I actually am :lol:
valsislav
100 W
I can see why. Your bike looks like an incredible machine. Aluminum filigree.Kepler said:
oatnet
1 MW
Kepler said:
Hi Kepler! Nice looking build, I love the stealth you acheived, yet again.
Nobody is gonna look at that and think 'ebike'. I wasn't satisfied until I hard mounted the pack. I found any movement whatsoever in the front mount to be unnerving, because movement of the bag adds its own steering inputs. How has it worked out for you?
-JD
Kepler
10 MW
Did a 30km ride with the front mount pack this morning. Couldn't even tell it was there. The mount on these bags is very well designed and with the bag being completely full of LiPo, there is next to no movment in it. Its a keeper Thanks for your perseverance and guidance on this one oatnet. 8)
Thanks for your perseverance and guidance on this one oatnet. 8)
Kepler said:Did a 30km ride with the front mount pack this morning. Couldn't even tell it was there. The mount on these bags is very well designed and with the bag being completely full of LiPo, there is next to no movment in it. Its a keeper
How many packs do you think would fit in that bag?
Alan B
100 GW
Kepler said:Did a 30km ride with the front mount pack this morning. Couldn't even tell it was there. The mount on these bags is very well designed and with the bag being completely full of LiPo, there is next to no movment in it. Its a keeper
Nice Job!
Kepler
10 MW
nomad85 said:Kepler said:Did a 30km ride with the front mount pack this morning. Couldn't even tell it was there. The mount on these bags is very well designed and with the bag being completely full of LiPo, there is next to no movment in it. Its a keeper
How many packs do you think would fit in that bag?
It fits 3 x 6S 5ah Turnigy packs together with 3 x 6S 3ah Turnigy packs.
Also fits 3 x 6S 8ah Zippy packs.
The 3 x 6S 8ah Zippy packs are what I plan to go with as squeezing in the 6 smaller packs is a really tight fit.
John in CR
100 TW
What happened to the motor shootout. That's what I want to see not endless discussion of high mounted batteries. Those little packs aren't heavy enough to cause a problem out front like that, which is the reason for the good results. Strap a 50lb pack up there and you guys will be singing a different tune. Just because we had no problem riding our buddies on the handlebars as kids doesn't mean it handled well that way. 1p or 2p in front just isn't heavy enough to matter up there making it a great option.
The extract from the bike dynamics wiki about less lateral tire movement was taken out of context. That part can also be looked at as for the same lateral handlebar movement, the bike is more off balance. Sure higher CG makes balancing easier, since everything happens slower, but speed and turn radius determine the lean angle regardless of CG location, so it's not like you lean any less though countersteer may actually be a bit less since you have more mass up high to "fall" into the lean angle needed for the turn.
In determining whether placement is actually beneficial or better, just take the amount of weight to the extreme and the truth will reveal itself. That's why added weight on our bikes is least noticeable low and rearward, not high and front. The exception being for racing type riding, where the high weight actually takes a shorter and straighter path through the curves, not for any other reason.
The extract from the bike dynamics wiki about less lateral tire movement was taken out of context. That part can also be looked at as for the same lateral handlebar movement, the bike is more off balance. Sure higher CG makes balancing easier, since everything happens slower, but speed and turn radius determine the lean angle regardless of CG location, so it's not like you lean any less though countersteer may actually be a bit less since you have more mass up high to "fall" into the lean angle needed for the turn.
In determining whether placement is actually beneficial or better, just take the amount of weight to the extreme and the truth will reveal itself. That's why added weight on our bikes is least noticeable low and rearward, not high and front. The exception being for racing type riding, where the high weight actually takes a shorter and straighter path through the curves, not for any other reason.
Kepler
10 MW
My apologies for adding to the off topic discussion. Regardless, I am pleased with the digression I certainly learnt a bit. Looking forward to more big motor big battery action now.
I certainly learnt a bit. Looking forward to more big motor big battery action now.
waynebergman
100 kW
Looks like you have opened the flood gates now John.
oatnet
1 MW
John in CR said:
John, please read a few posts back on this thread to fill in the gaps. The Greyborg motor i had was not in the 13kv I asked for, so I sold it. Greyborg is only stocking the cromotor in the awkward 9kv, not the 13kv that would have the top end to compete with the 5403. Hence the failure of the shotout and rename of the title, until I find a suitable replacement. I'd be glad to run one of your delta/wye motors for example. However, the 54xx group buy is months away, so there won't be much to see here until it arrives, maybe some accressories and mounts. In the meantime, do you mind if I use the thread that I created, to discuss a specific aspect of these builds, with other people who are interested in it? Assuming not, please let the discussion of front mounted packs proceed.
John in CR said:
Please read up on the 5-6 builds I have done using up to 35lb on a front mount, where it vastly improves handling, as the wiki asserts. The results have been so dramatic I wouldn't build these shoot out bikes any other way. I also would put a 50lb pack on chromo not aluminum.
It handled poorly because the load kept moving, which is why hard mounting is important.John in CR said:
Done, and done. Works great, that's why I keep doing it (like with the 28lb packs on these bikes), that's why heavy-load delivery bikes have been built with front baskets since the inception of that duty cycle, that's why I keep preaching about it. It works.John in CR said:
John in CR said:
I disagree, and I have long asserted that having most of the mass in the rear will lift the front wheel sideways on a sharp, low traction turn, and is therefore dangerous. I have direct experience on this.
Have you ever tried a front hard-mounted pack, or are you rejecting it out of theory?
oatnet
1 MW
Kepler said:
Cool! Do you have a link to that bag? I'd like to try it! I looked for a good solid bag, for stealthiness, but I ended going down the ammo can route instead.
-JD
1 thing about that bag i noticed..
http://topeak.com/products/Bags/Compact_Handlebar_Bag
Max. Load: 5 kgs / 11 lbs
Kinda wimpy.. OK if you have a small battery i guess. Remember that our bikes do experience more vibration at high speeds than most.
I still like the pelican case idea.
http://topeak.com/products/Bags/Compact_Handlebar_Bag
Max. Load: 5 kgs / 11 lbs
Kinda wimpy.. OK if you have a small battery i guess. Remember that our bikes do experience more vibration at high speeds than most.
I still like the pelican case idea.
Kepler
10 MW
Yes its a small bag that happend to suit my commuter build. Certainly not suitable for setup's like oatnet's though. Pelican case with good solid brackets is much more suitable.
This Topeak bag is really well made, compact and has a solid quick release. I think its a good option if 500 Whrs is all you are after. 500 Whrs doesnt get you too far on a high powered setup but on my light weight geared hub setup, is good for 40km at a very decent cruise speed. Horses for courses.
Weight wise, I am not even carrying 4kg in it so I am well under the weight limit of the bag. Angling it down like I have also takes a heap of load off the mount.
This Topeak bag is really well made, compact and has a solid quick release. I think its a good option if 500 Whrs is all you are after. 500 Whrs doesnt get you too far on a high powered setup but on my light weight geared hub setup, is good for 40km at a very decent cruise speed. Horses for courses.
Weight wise, I am not even carrying 4kg in it so I am well under the weight limit of the bag. Angling it down like I have also takes a heap of load off the mount.
oatnet
1 MW
nomad85 said:
Thanks for the link Nomad! I like that mount. I was a fan of the mount on the topeak explorer rear racks - until I stopped using rear racks
- so I'll have to try their front mount. It looks perfect for a light pack like the one on my wife's bike. Kepler, thanks for the product idea!-JD
ohzee
100 kW
I can't say enough good things about Topeak's customer support. My year old rear luggage bag had a broke zipper and a tear in it.
I opened a ticket with topeak's customer support showed proof of purchase and got myself a brand new updated bag.
I was impressed.
I opened a ticket with topeak's customer support showed proof of purchase and got myself a brand new updated bag.
I was impressed.
johnrobholmes
10 MW
John in CR said:
I have to disagree here too, unless we are considering a bike going under 5mph. My last front mounted box was over 35 pounds and it rode like butter through the turns! At low to zero speed, low weight is easier to handle. As the speed increases, handling becomes easier and faster with higher CG. The lower the CG, the more extreme the lean angle and the slower the bike flicks underneath a rider. If we were riding on 2d tires the lean angle would not change, but since there is a width to our tires the lean angle changes with CG.
Kepler
10 MW
One other thing I like with the front mount is the balance of the bike when just wheeling it and parking. The bike actually feels lighter with the weight evenly distributed. You guys know what its like to pick the rear wheel up by the back of the seat when parking. The weight of the hub and batteries combined always feels wrong. Feels much more bike like now.
sparkcrx
1 mW
Very interesting reading. Oatnet, I love your work - and your insight into front mount packs is fascinating.
Having built my Giant CRX with a seat-rack mounted Ping 36v 15ah (5.6kg's / 12lbs) out back (350w geared FWD), I find that the rear has a nasty sway to it at low speeds.
At higher speeds, with smaller inputs, counter steering for example; there is still a kind of sway, but with the addition of a 'springyness' left and right which settles down quick - but is noticable.
You can live with it, but it's not exactly confidence inspiring and I even feel like it cannot be doing the alloy frame much good at times!
Recently I have been fantasizing about the possibility of building a more leisurely, longer range bicycle, with rear drive and some serious battery power up front (around 15kg's / 33llbs).
However, I quickly dismissed the idea, thinking it could not possibly be feasible to have that much mass up front AND high.
Interestingly, not only do you suggest it's feasible, but preferable?!?!!?!!?
If that's the case, this could highly likely be the beginning of a new project for me!
Call me crazy, but the idea of a rough around the edges, weather-beaten looking comfort bike, that I can park anywhere, with stealth rear drive and even more stealth basket up front sounds just right to me!
It almost doesn't get much more stealth than that.
Sorry to highjack your thread, but you are the only person I can find truly talking from both a theoretical and practical experience perspective on this topic.
Having built my Giant CRX with a seat-rack mounted Ping 36v 15ah (5.6kg's / 12lbs) out back (350w geared FWD), I find that the rear has a nasty sway to it at low speeds.
At higher speeds, with smaller inputs, counter steering for example; there is still a kind of sway, but with the addition of a 'springyness' left and right which settles down quick - but is noticable.
You can live with it, but it's not exactly confidence inspiring and I even feel like it cannot be doing the alloy frame much good at times!
Recently I have been fantasizing about the possibility of building a more leisurely, longer range bicycle, with rear drive and some serious battery power up front (around 15kg's / 33llbs).
However, I quickly dismissed the idea, thinking it could not possibly be feasible to have that much mass up front AND high.
Interestingly, not only do you suggest it's feasible, but preferable?!?!!?!!?
If that's the case, this could highly likely be the beginning of a new project for me!
Call me crazy, but the idea of a rough around the edges, weather-beaten looking comfort bike, that I can park anywhere, with stealth rear drive and even more stealth basket up front sounds just right to me!
It almost doesn't get much more stealth than that.
Sorry to highjack your thread, but you are the only person I can find truly talking from both a theoretical and practical experience perspective on this topic.