14 ms·
> The Free Drive system works by converting the rider’s pedaling power into electrical energy via a small generator housed between the pedals. It then delivers
by sandgiant 4y ago
> The Free Drive system works by converting the rider’s pedaling power into electrical energy via a small generator housed between the pedals. It then delivers this energy to the rear wheel (or wheels) via cables strung inside or outside the frame of the bike, rather than sending it mechanically through a chain or belt. Excess energy created by pedaling is fed back into the battery. The end result is a power system with fewer moving parts to complicate construction.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/2/22653697/schaeffler-free-drive-e-bike-system-chainless https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/2/22653697/schaeffler-free-d...
- ashika 4y agopedal by wire
- kazinator 4y agoNo different from how most diesel trains work.
- uoaei 4y agoBikes handle much differently from diesel trains. This may work for some but I can see it occupying some kind of uncanny valley in the riders' psyche for a while.
- Fatnino 4y agoYou ever ride in one of those bar on wheels things you find in touristy places? It's got "barstools" along both sides and the passengers/revelers are supposed to turn the pedals under their seats while the bartender/driver steers. In reality, the pedaling charges the battery somewhat but the vast majority of the battery power comes from being plugged in at a charger before the ride. You can't actually rely on a bunch of drunk sods to keep it moving.
- kazinator 4y ago> Bikes handle much differently from diesel trains. So, like, no nudging the right handlebar forward to turn right? Bummer!
- KennyBlanken 4y agoTotally different application/need though. Locomotives need to generate enormous amounts of force, for long periods of time, regardless of speed. Often at zero speed. That capability is much more important than the efficiency loss of the generator/motor powertrain. Such capability is not necessary on a bicycle, where efficiency is extremely important.
- jskrablin 4y agoSo... a generator, an electric motor, few microcontrollers, bunch of sensors, a battery with it's own management circuits, wires, a bunch of code running on everything... is supposed to be "less complicated" than a chain and two (sometimes more) sprockets? Or did I misunderstand the press release?
- colordrops 4y agoYour phone is way more complicated than your bike and the hardware probably fails less often.
- rilezg 4y agoIdk, if you tried to use your phone as a bike I bet it would fail pretty quickly.
- colordrops 4y agoI don't get your argument. What I'm saying is that complexity isn't necessarily directly correlated to reliability.
- rilezg 4y agoSure, but a hammer is both simpler and much more reliable than a phone. My point is that it is meaningless to compare items with completely different functions (I would say apples and oranges, but it is more like apples and rocks).
- Steltek 4y agoMy phone doesn't sit out in the sun/rain/snow at a bike rack and doesn't have any substantial moving parts.
- colordrops 4y agoI think I didn't articulate my point well. It's that complexity isn't a 1 to 1 mapping to reliability. There is plenty of complex equipment that fits your criteria. My pool pump is full of electronics, has moving parts, sits in inclement weather, and lasts for years. There is equipment that can sit near the combustion chamber of a rocket experiencing extreme g forces, pressure, and heat and survive. It can be engineered.