Not really. RS Lyrik 150mm is 561mm axle to crown, Fox 36 150 is 557mm. So that 4mm difference has maybe a 1mm impact on BB height.
Fuel EXe Trek Fuel EXe Megathread!
- Thread starter Rob Rides EMTB
- Start date
Free_Tibet
Member
Same for me, I usually do most of the maintenance on previous bikes! But this is my first e-bike, and the most expensive bike I have ever owned, so am leaving it to the Trek team for anything at the moment especially during Warranty and especially anything electrical related ;-)
Re the electrical cable for the remote TQ switch, I don't believe the Trek mechanics will be snipping that - I believe their intention is to coil it up under the display and wrap it in foam to stop it making any noise. (
)
Thanks Rob!
DBSwiss
Active member
Fantastic to have somebody from TQ on here! Thank you. You are probably already aware of the separate thread around some motor noise discussions. TQ HPR50 Grinding Noise
Rob shared some of the insights from TQ already. My local Trek shop was not aware of that information. It would be great to share the grinding noise explanation and timeline to resolve with Trek shops and dealers. I believe it could reassure customers.
Thanks! And I totally agree. Right now we are doing some baseline testing. Once we progress we will share a comprehensive explanation and a reliable timeline....
My thoughts exactly. The TQ seems so much less efficient. I was thinking about an EXE when it’s time to replace my Rise M10 but am now leaning towards something Fazua based.
Swingset
Active member
There are so many features that drew me to the EXe. Quiet being way up on the list. Went up my local lunch trail for the first time yesterday to baseline it versus my Decoy with the E8000. Two flat miles to the trail then 900 feet up over the next two miles then back down the same way.
Wow what a difference. On the Decoy climbing I need Trail mode. Its heavy and not real agile on the switchbacks. I descends like a tank with all the mass down low. On the EXe i was using either Eco or Trail and going just as fast. Almost dead quiet and I am working a touch harder (good thing). Other trail users have no idea its and ebike which is huge for me. EXe descends in a much more fun way. The rear is able to be steered and the tight downhill switchbacks are much easier. I am having to muscle the bike much less. There is one hike a bike of about 30 vert. I dread trying to lug the YT up that. The EXe is a breeze.
The net effect is that both bikes batteries are depleted about 30% on this ride. It's not a 'boost' bike for me. I am smitten right now. The fact the Roman at TQ is watching is a very good thing as well- it will do wonders for confidence.
The guys at the dealer really don't know anything about these bikes currently and this forum is the gold standard for knowledge transfer right now.
Wow what a difference. On the Decoy climbing I need Trail mode. Its heavy and not real agile on the switchbacks. I descends like a tank with all the mass down low. On the EXe i was using either Eco or Trail and going just as fast. Almost dead quiet and I am working a touch harder (good thing). Other trail users have no idea its and ebike which is huge for me. EXe descends in a much more fun way. The rear is able to be steered and the tight downhill switchbacks are much easier. I am having to muscle the bike much less. There is one hike a bike of about 30 vert. I dread trying to lug the YT up that. The EXe is a breeze.
The net effect is that both bikes batteries are depleted about 30% on this ride. It's not a 'boost' bike for me. I am smitten right now. The fact the Roman at TQ is watching is a very good thing as well- it will do wonders for confidence.
The guys at the dealer really don't know anything about these bikes currently and this forum is the gold standard for knowledge transfer right now.
DancingWithMyself
Member
Have been having an unusual amount of pedal strikes but thinking I was just getting used to the bike, maybe I needed some more LSC, etc. Just measured, and sure enough: about 333mm in low sitting on the floor with a 150mm Lyrik. Took delivery in late September in United States.Please check your BB heights, and share!
It seems we have an "out-of-spec" batch of frames doing the rounds, maybe early production runs, with Trek subsequently changing a seatstay mould? I believe all the sizes have the same rear triangles.
The quoted Trek Fuel Exe geo-chart shows a BB height of 342mm in LOW, or 349mm in HIGH. My bike, and 6 different stock bikes on the shop floor that I measured (in all different frame sizes) have a BB height of ± 330mm in LOW (150mm, 29 FR &RR) or 337mm in HIGH. Thats is 12mm below the GEO chart of 342mm LOW, 349mm HIGH.
The shocks are all 205mm eye-to-eye and the chainstays are ±438mm, so it leaves me to believe we have a batch of seatstays (connected to the flipchip) is out-of spec (too short), which drops the BB a lot (12mm in this case).
So really curious to see what is doing the rounds in other parts of the world? Please share!
The bikes were held-up by the saddle on a bike stand, with rear wheels barely touching, so no sagging
Owned a couple of Santa Cruz's as the geo revolution took place, so I'm used to the BB being a little lower than the geo chart. But this is of a different magnitude. WTF.
Going to ask my LBS to call Trek and put it in High mode in the meantime.
BUT, the highly scientific use the iphone clinometer with the bike pointed both ways yields the stated 65 degree HTA. You'd think that if the BB was 10mm lower than it was supposed to be and the problem was the rear triangle, the HTA would be slacker than stated, right?
I'll take a bunch more measurements tomorrow, think on it, and report back what I hear from Trek via the LBS.
Awesome and very useful post. Thanks for raising the issue.
No problem!
The iphone angle meter does rounding, so you could very well be at 64.5deg HA which is displayed as 65.
My bike is still in the shop, with Trek given no feedback on the issue. Like I said, 6 bikes in the shop on 330mm in Low.
If it helps:Please check your BB heights, and share!
It seems we have an "out-of-spec" batch of frames doing the rounds, maybe early production runs, with Trek subsequently changing a seatstay mould? I believe all the sizes have the same rear triangles.
The quoted Trek Fuel Exe geo-chart shows a BB height of 342mm in LOW, or 349mm in HIGH. My bike, and 6 different stock bikes on the shop floor that I measured (in all different frame sizes) have a BB height of ± 330mm in LOW (150mm, 29 FR &RR) or 337mm in HIGH. Thats is 12mm below the GEO chart of 342mm LOW, 349mm HIGH.
The shocks are all 205mm eye-to-eye and the chainstays are ±438mm, so it leaves me to believe we have a batch of seatstays (connected to the flipchip) is out-of spec (too short), which drops the BB a lot (12mm in this case).
So really curious to see what is doing the rounds in other parts of the world? Please share!
The bikes were held-up by the saddle on a bike stand, with rear wheels barely touching, so no sagging
Size Large: 330 mm BB Height in Low Setting
Location: USA
Delivery End of October (however, I believe it's been at the dealer for a few weeks)
BBFII
Member
This is trying to call out a "countdown" that is different than you typical ride-range countdown.
The #2:20 with the hour glass is saying it should take about that long till 100% charge. (the last 5% takes a very long time to protect the battery health) This # will refresh as the charge goes on.
This is one approach that is different than most "ride computers" that track how long you've been riding. There are plenty of other devices, watches, garmins that can track your ride time... but very few things that can give your range in time. "do I have enough battery to do another 30min loop?"
Also, very interesting cover on your button, have you had water damage issues? or just playing it safe?
Just playing it safe, have read a few tales of other peoples displays failing presumably due to water damage, so I thought the most likely entry point for water would be around that button, so I put some electrical insulation tape over it, it seems to have sealed it pretty well.
mitea
Member
T
Thats a really cool feature. Thats what I miss on other Ebikes. Another nice little feature that shows how well integrated the system is.
Swingset
Active member
All 9.7 owners- can highly recommend that you check the bottom of the TransX post to make sure it has a cable barrel.
Fox Racing Shox Transfer Dropper Post Cable Bushing
Also, any of the quality dropper remote levers with a ball bearing and no play makes this post much, much better. I got a Wolf Tooth for I Spec EV for reference.
Thnaks, this is consistent what I am finding with bikes here. Definitely much lower than the quoted 342mm (LOW). I would contact Trek.
dajimmers
New Member
The PNW lever has been working very well for me. Will check for the barrel. I’ve adjusted the dropper up and down quite a bit to adjust for three different rider heights, and it does take a little adjustment and cable fiddling at the head tube to get right each time but once set has worked fine.
Swingset
Active member
I had to take the battery out and remove the plastic guard above it to be able to shuttle the dropper housing back and forth inside the frame. Lesson learned the hard way.
Emailsucks98
Well-known member
Just running some numbers here.
The entire Fazua system is actually 1.3lbs heavier than the TQ system, both with batteries. That nearly offsets adding the 2lb TQ range extender, at which point the TQ would have 520 Wh.
Of course Fazua will have a range extender too, but for weight/range comparisons sake, the TQ w/extender is closest in weight to the weight of the Fazua w/o.
Efficiency seems purely speculative, since each motor may be most efficient at different boost levels. Plus all the other variables.
Steve Jones @ EMBN brought up a good point, the 360wh TQ battery is so small & light, why not just carry a second. Easily fits in a small hydration pack and a much better value than the range extender too.
I don't think the tq motor is significantly more inefficient than any of the others. I did a ride yesterday with a mate with an orbea rise M20 , we rode at the same pace, but he is lighter than me by about 5 or 6 kilos, his bike has faster rolling tyres,and most importantly he is fitter than me. I finished with 28% battery remaining ,he finished with 35% remaining, that seems like they're about evens to me taking into account his lighter weight,quicker tyres and better fitness.
Obviously this is all anecdotal,but I don't think the tq motor has any problems with efficiency.
That's exactly what crossed my mind today. I ordered a range extender, but on the rides where I need an extender, I probably carry my backpack too. So an extra battery just a bit heavier then a range extender.
Range extender was delayed till December and I need the extra battery not before spring 2023.
Does anybody know the order number of the battery?
Emailsucks98
Well-known member
I agree. More range in boost mode (with a larger/heavier battery & motor, and more torque too) does not mean more efficient.
This article was great. - especially the part about reduction ratio. I'm speculating that the lower reduction ratio is what makes the TQ feel so natural, and the motor is optimized for that natural feel at eco/trail modes. And that a higher reduction ratios might create more torque, and make the motor more efficient in boost modes, possibly at the cost of feel & efficiency in lower assist modes.
Emailsucks98
Well-known member
I just ordered one up through my local Trek dealer, they said February ETA, $750usd. Quite excited obviously!
JP-NZ
E*POWAH Elite World Champion
The only benefit I can see for the TQ range extender is being 160wh it’s airplane travel capable.
Free_Tibet
Member
For the replacement Main battery, will you also need to order the 2 end Mounting Brackets?
....to save you having to swap them also when you switch batteries. Iirc, the replacement battery doesn't come with the mounting brackets.... but I may be wrong.
Emailsucks98
Well-known member
I'll let you know when it comes in! My guess is that since I'm buying through Trek, they'll be included. If not I'll probably just have something 3d-printed locally, they don't see horribly complicated.
dannyb
New Member
@Rob Rides EMTB
I just installed a Super Deluxe coil shock with Tractive tune, SAR 475lb spring.
Only thing is it's 205 x 65mm stroke. Did you find that the extra rear travel on your EXe Enduro build had enough clearance? I think you also overstroked to 65mm right? Do I need to run Mino Link in high or do anything else special?
My build is kinda similar to yours that inspired me. Fork is 160mm Fox 36 Performance Elite Grip2 w/PUSH ACS3 coil conversion.
I just installed a Super Deluxe coil shock with Tractive tune, SAR 475lb spring.
Only thing is it's 205 x 65mm stroke. Did you find that the extra rear travel on your EXe Enduro build had enough clearance? I think you also overstroked to 65mm right? Do I need to run Mino Link in high or do anything else special?
My build is kinda similar to yours that inspired me. Fork is 160mm Fox 36 Performance Elite Grip2 w/PUSH ACS3 coil conversion.
Last edited:
mitea
Member
Would be interested to. Let us know if you have it and feel free to write some review about it how it feels on the trails having a spare battery with you etc.
Does anyone know the torque spec for the lower shock bolt? Also, can you get the service manuals with torque specs anywhere? I went to Trek’s website and nothing comes up. I’ve mostly owned Specialized bikes and they have great manuals with all the specs easily downloadable on their website.
Similar Threads
-
-
-
-
-
Fuel EXe Fuel Exe 8XT - Rotor upgrade RT66 to RT86? UPDATE - New rotors ordered
- Started by DocUK
- Replies: 14