For begining, there are two major types of engines :
-A- brushed motor (used in LIFT)
An electric motor with brushes, it's simple and reliable conventional engine, in fact the one you have always known.
-B-The brushless motor
An electric motor without brushes on which is grafted a complex electronic controller, which allows to replace the brushes and to increase the performance of certain characteristics.
Why The brushed technology and often criticize?
is considered that the wrong has brushed is not efficient because it is associated with some other technical choices that do not highlight these strengths, which not make this technology not
necessarily optimal for some specific cases (including hubs motors).
But that would be like saying: "Ferrari is a very bad car ..." forgetting to add: "For off road."
It is this technology combinations aspect not necessarily consistent optimally, which is mostly misunderstood by consumers.
They therefore consider that ignorance is not a performance or old technology.
Users typically read on a forum: "The brushless is better!"
they persuade themselves in without seeking further ...
That is why this is not necessarily true for the LIFT engine:
For most purists of the brushless electric motor provides with very good characteristics for the following reasons:
It allows a range of rpm, minimum / maximum larger than a brushed motor.
For this technology accepts tensions that increase the maximum amplitude without problems.
There is no resistance, in particular freewheel.
-argument 3 -
It need less service on the brush because there is none.
There is a good torque and good performance especially at high speeds.
But keep in mind that all these benefits are very useful for some tipical applications and only some specific cases such as hubs for ebikes or RC car engine.
For exemple, with a hub motor, the wheel rotates continuously and sometimes has a large high speeds, which induces stresses totally different than a motor crank as the LIFT:
-For Argument 1-
No need to have a large range of RPM with the lift, contrary to a hub motor which has a fixed transmission ratio, it can be on a crank drive motor as the LIFT play on the different speeds with the rear derailleur.
We must therefore remain in use speed range close to the average velocity of a cyclist , if the reduction ratio is good the performance of the brushed motor will be the best.
No need to go at much higher tension, that would increase the speed of rotation of the crank and the ridere can't rotate the legs fast enough to help the engine ...
-For Argument 2-
Concerning the "natural" freewheel with a brushless motor, this resistance is bad on a hub motor, because that's slow you every time you stop using assistance (flat, downhill, slight side without assistance ...).
On the LIFT-MTB system, we mount the motor with a mechanical freewheel output not that the pedal is slow when you ride.
So you don't need in this case to have a freewheel by engine technologie...
-For Argument 3-
For the brushed wear this is again valid for a wheel which rotates very rapidly and permanently, but for a motor crank, as we have designed it is negligible because:
-A- When the LIFT motor rotâtes, it is not very fast (on the order of 5 times slower than hub.)
-B- For all arts or you do not pedal (flat, downhill ...) the engine will not work at all, compared to a Wheel continuously turn ).
-C- As you pedal without the freewheel help take the relay so the engine is not therefore cause no wear coals.
-D- So there is only small phases when you use the engine as the brushed come in contact ...
Representing a theoretical wear rate very much lower!
-For Argument 4-
Regarding consumption and the torque at high speeds, this is again interesting for the hub motor use, but not mid drive crank Engine .
yes brushless performs better on paper than a brushed, so it would lower consomation.
not incluing the losses for the reduction ratio!
As we have high-speed torque with brushless has this requires a larger reduction rate to not rotate the crank too fast than the rider can move the legs.
Reduce speed, generally require increasing the number of gears and parts, that creates more losses due to friction at the working gear ect ...
More gears is more weight and more volume for the system.
So what is gained on one side by the use of a brushless motor that consumes less one party subsequently falls with the various ratio réductions.
If we add that the brushless is more complex and sensitive technology in management controllers and that it costs much more expensive to buy ,This would increase lot the final price of the kit for nothink.
We could develop an adaptable kit with brushless technology involving the use of a motor / controller more expensive, and a multitude of customized parts and more as gears, shafts, housings, bearings and specific parts needed to have a report effectively reducing (as in the photo below cons).
But if it were to win at best 10% of autonomy being heavier and probably by increasing the price 2500 or 3000euro not sure it would have been more seller ...
In short, so we made the choice of brushed because this technology allowed the best ratio
between the different parameters to be taken into account in the design of our product.