Bosch Range Tests - Comparisons
- Thread starter Suns_PSD
- Start date
I‘ll add my real world experience of having owning 2 G5 Bosch bikes in our household, having ridden a couple more extensively & having now ridden 2 Avinox bikes (Mith & Druid extensively - probably about 3000km in total).
Im about 85kg in kit & consider myself reasonably fit, and have used the screens on the display to normalise my output when I decided to do some comparative rides. For the sake of clarity, I used the same wheelset across all bikes.
The Bosch bikes, of various suspension platforms are all within 5% of each other with the same amount of climbing. On a really good day, in great conditions & ideal temp, they consistently hover around 1500m of climbing in 30km, in turbo before they are done. For clarity, this is with the update, and 800wh batteries. The 600wh bike I ride I couldn’t get it past 1150m in Turbo.
The Avinox equipped bikes I tested in two different scenarios. One with ’stock’ settings, one with outputs to match, as close as I could in terms of feel to the Bosch, all in Turbo. In stock setup, no surprises, it was done by 1350m. It averages 8-10% faster up each climb.
In a comparative performance setup, it also averaged just shy 1500m of elevation on my 30km loop. Therefore my conclusion is the variance between the two when you have ’normalised’ the power is negligible. The obvious thing here is more power out = more power in. I’m under no illusion that if the Bosch motor was pushing out the Avinox numbers, it would drop in its corresponding range To similar levels.
Im about 85kg in kit & consider myself reasonably fit, and have used the screens on the display to normalise my output when I decided to do some comparative rides. For the sake of clarity, I used the same wheelset across all bikes.
The Bosch bikes, of various suspension platforms are all within 5% of each other with the same amount of climbing. On a really good day, in great conditions & ideal temp, they consistently hover around 1500m of climbing in 30km, in turbo before they are done. For clarity, this is with the update, and 800wh batteries. The 600wh bike I ride I couldn’t get it past 1150m in Turbo.
The Avinox equipped bikes I tested in two different scenarios. One with ’stock’ settings, one with outputs to match, as close as I could in terms of feel to the Bosch, all in Turbo. In stock setup, no surprises, it was done by 1350m. It averages 8-10% faster up each climb.
In a comparative performance setup, it also averaged just shy 1500m of elevation on my 30km loop. Therefore my conclusion is the variance between the two when you have ’normalised’ the power is negligible. The obvious thing here is more power out = more power in. I’m under no illusion that if the Bosch motor was pushing out the Avinox numbers, it would drop in its corresponding range To similar levels.
- Thread starter
- #154
It's definitely a great data point, thanks for posting!
For sure your experiences, Plummets & Robs are different than what is typically experienced by most reviewers that I have read regarding this topic. Doesn't make them wrong or you guys wrong. Heck, the motors have even changed at times.
The e-mtb mag efficiency tests will be another data point but still not conclusive but at least will tell us the efficiency of the particular motors that they have on test.
But I'm still watching the space carefully.
thx
Last edited:
TheKaiser
Active member
Thanks for posting these charts, they are very informative! Regarding the power outputs for a given setting on the chart, the Bosch is clearly labeled with their normal terminology and the key on the right matches the colors on the chart, however the Avinox colors don't seem to match and I'm unclear about the terminology. Assuming a similar layout to the Bosch chart, with higher power at the top and lower at the bottom, do you happen to know if they're really using power levels (Stufen) that start at 15 on the low end and stop at 7 on the high end, or are there additional levels that go up to 1 that they didn't include in their testing? Similarly, do you know what "Avinox 10/24" is, as it seems to be distinctly different from the other levels in terms of the terminology? Thanks again!
TheKaiser
Active member
BTW, early on I was thinking "Wow guys, give it a rest" in regard to the back and forth between you and @Suns_PSD but, after so many pages of it, I've actually really warmed up to it! I don't know if the very popular TV/Movies in "The Odd Couple" franchise made it over to your side of the pond, but I think if you guys wanted to move in together, it could make for a really entertaining TV show!
You could do 1 season in Switzerland, and 1 in Texas so it could also have some fun "Fish out of water" culture clash elements!
sethimus
😠 Donald Duck 😠
those are the support levels of the avinox motor you can setup in the app. 10/24 was the software stand at that date before they released the big power updateThanks for posting these charts, they are very informative! Regarding the power outputs for a given setting on the chart, the Bosch is clearly labeled with their normal terminology and the key on the right matches the colors on the chart, however the Avinox colors don't seem to match and I'm unclear about the terminology. Assuming a similar layout to the Bosch chart, with higher power at the top and lower at the bottom, do you happen to know if they're really using power levels (Stufen) that start at 15 on the low end and stop at 7 on the high end, or are there additional levels that go up to 1 that they didn't include in their testing? Similarly, do you know what "Avinox 10/24" is, as it seems to be distinctly different from the other levels in terms of the terminology? Thanks again!
- Thread starter
- #158
*Edited efficiencies due to Sethimus' suggestion to utilize ChatGPT to calculate efficiency.
Fazua 60 results.
ebike-mtb.com
I own the F60 and it does work fine but I consider it outdated. But it does perform well enough. I did run mine completely out of power yesterday for the first time ever and it was really nice to be able to pedal and even ride the final 2 trail segments with my 2 other e-bike buddies, albeit at a slower pace.
Personally I think the F60 is still a better package than the Bosch SX even with less peak power due to lower noise and a larger battery.
Edited, Chat GPT calculated efficiency but it was nearly identical to my calculations using the paper tests.
So to summarize so far we have:
Other notes:
1) The Mahle was only able to take 200w continuous power in the lab, otherwise it glitched compared to others that were tested at 250w of rider input.
2) The HP60 has some torque sensing issues and was unable to complete the test.
Fazua 60 results.
FAZUA Ride 60 – In Our big e-Bike Motor Group Test
In Our 2026 Motor Group Test, the FAZUA Ride 60 Goes Head-to-Head With 10 Rival Systems – Find Out How It Performs on the Trail and in the Lab!
ebike-mtb.com
I own the F60 and it does work fine but I consider it outdated. But it does perform well enough. I did run mine completely out of power yesterday for the first time ever and it was really nice to be able to pedal and even ride the final 2 trail segments with my 2 other e-bike buddies, albeit at a slower pace.
Personally I think the F60 is still a better package than the Bosch SX even with less peak power due to lower noise and a larger battery.
Edited, Chat GPT calculated efficiency but it was nearly identical to my calculations using the paper tests.
So to summarize so far we have:
Other notes:
1) The Mahle was only able to take 200w continuous power in the lab, otherwise it glitched compared to others that were tested at 250w of rider input.
2) The HP60 has some torque sensing issues and was unable to complete the test.
Last edited:
sethimus
😠 Donald Duck 😠
just ask chatgpt (fazua result):
Read approximate values from the graph
From visual inspection:
Motor output power
- Starts ≈ 335 W
- Ends ≈ 275 W
- Rough average ≈ 305–310 W
Electrical input power
- Starts ≈ 425 W
- Ends ≈ 350 W
- Rough average ≈ 385–390 W
Average efficiency
\eta_{\text{avg}} \approx \frac{\text{average output}}{\text{average input}}
Using mid-range values:
\eta_{\text{avg}} \approx \frac{308}{388} \approx 0.79
Result
Average efficiency over the full range ≈ 79–80 %
sethimus
😠 Donald Duck 😠
why are you still bringing this up? the motor failed the test, and was tested with less input than the other motors. you can't compare that with the other results at all
- Thread starter
- #161
This is really cool, how exactly did you get ChatGPT to read the graph? Just a screenshot?
Thx!
sethimus
😠 Donald Duck 😠
just upload the picture, i used this prompt:
(actually i use pictures ALL THE TIME to ask it stuff, earlier this morning i accidently switched my scale from g to oz and didn't now how to reverse that, simple picture was all it needed)
(actually i use pictures ALL THE TIME to ask it stuff, earlier this morning i accidently switched my scale from g to oz and didn't now how to reverse that, simple picture was all it needed
)- Thread starter
- #163
Because the statement from the article is contradictory/ unclear in it's wording, possibly a translation error.
They provided both graphs needed to calculate efficiency and that's all ChatGPT needed.
sethimus
😠 Donald Duck 😠
all other graphs clearly state 250w rider input, NOT 200w. they literally couldn't test it at that wattage, something with how their test setup was built. therefore, they published the values they could test at. just don't compare them, as the basis is not the same...
- Thread starter
- #165
Ah yes, now I see what they were indicating in the notes.
For sure it's best to have all variables removed. That said, they still were accurately able to measure electrical input power vs. motor output power it just was with 200w input vs 250 like with the other motors. Can't buy a Mahle anyways.
I'll place an asterick next to that result.
Thx.
- Thread starter
- #166
The Bosch SX was just added.
Updated comparison (all motors analyzed)
| Motor | Avg efficiency |
|---|---|
| Mahle M40 | ~80% |
| Fazua Ride 60 | ~79% |
| Bosch CX-R | ~78% |
| maxon | ~77% |
| Pinion MGU | ~75% |
| Bosch SX | ~73% |
A few notes, the Fazua 60 is a better performing (not reliability!) mid power motor than the Bosch SX. It doesn't rattle, it's more efficient & it has a 480w battery.
Another interesting point is that similar how to the Rise runs a full power motor with a small battery, that might be the best way to get a lighter bike. If the Bosch CX is more efficient you can technically run a smaller battery than required with the SX, negating some of that .5 kg motor weight difference plus other advantages (access to more power, silence, only one motor available so reduced parts, larger heat sink, etc.).
I know that I'm unique around here in this regard, but I think it's foolish to look at 'weight' of the motor system if you don't consider meters climbed/ kg. In an extreme example, if a motor had half the efficiency, it would need 2x the battery to climb the same amount and I know that everyone understands the implications of that on the practical real world weight so I don't need to explain.
I was hoping to see all of the results as well as see the new M2 before I decided on my next bike, but I have a good idea of where it's going and this played a part in why I nearly insisted on a bike that I could get the CX-R motor in combination with the 600w battery.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #167
Shimano EP801 – In Our big e-Bike Motor Group Test
In Our 2026 Motor Group Test, the Shimano EP801 Motor Goes Head-to-Head With 10 Strong Rivals – Read The Full Review To Find Out How It Fares Against The Competition!
ebike-mtb.com
The Shimano was (imo) a total dud and they were unable to get it to test consistently. It's outdated anyways and quite irrelevant.
Last edited:
That isn’t even close to what they concluded.Shimano EP801 – In Our big e-Bike Motor Group Test
In Our 2026 Motor Group Test, the Shimano EP801 Motor Goes Head-to-Head With 10 Strong Rivals – Read The Full Review To Find Out How It Fares Against The Competition!
The Shimano was a total dud and they were unable to get it test consistently. It's outdated anyways and quite irrelevant.
The Shimano EP801 still delivers a well-rounded package with intuitive ride characteristics and handy features like automatic shifting when paired with Shimano’s in-house Di2 system. However, the EP801 doesn’t lead in any single category – and in the finer details, small but decisive shortcomings become apparent, particularly in the control and display interface and in traction, where the EP801 falls well behind the strong competition. To avoid losing further market relevance, it’s clear that new developments from Japan are urgently needed.
- Thread starter
- #169
"
4. The Rattle Problem — and Why It Exists
Yes — the Avinox motor has a slight rattle during coasting.
But it’s quieter than Shimano EP8 and Bosch CX Gen 4.
Here’s the real insight:
The rattle was present in early testing. Instead of redesigning internal one-way bearings (a major mechanical change), Avinox engineers:
- Ultra-sealed the spindle
- Used extremely tight seals to muffle internal movement
- Reduced audible noise through mechanical isolation
- Increased internal friction
- Higher drag when coasting
- Measurable resistance even with the chain removed
- Efficiency loss
- Energy loss (~10–20 watts)
- Reduced freewheel speed
If the rattle is mechanically eliminated in the next version, seals can be loosened →
✔ Less drag
✔ Higher efficiency
✔ Faster coasting
✔ Better range
✔ More natural ride feel"
TheKaiser
Active member
That all makes perfect sense to me, except that I am struggling to understand how motor friction leads to "Reduced freewheel speed" and how the new model might therefore offer "Faster Coasting". No one is running these bikes with a fixed gear hub and front freewheel as far as I know, so when coasting (i.e. drivetrain not rotating) how does motor friction matter?
- Thread starter
- #171
I can't say as I'm not familiar with the internals of any of these motors.
It does appear that owning a current Avinox, will be like owning a Gen4 Bosch, in about 3 months. Totally functional, not a thing wrong with it, but it's the old version nearly already. This is the DJI MO. However these improvements are in fact needed imo.
Last edited:
TheKaiser
Active member
Yeah, Francis at MTBR has been around forever, so I would think he knows what he's talking about, but if the motor isn't spinning, it really doesn't seem like it should affect coasting speed. The only thing I can think of is if it has something to do with the "coast shift" functions. He does talk about the benefits of being able to shift while you coast, so that was on his mind, but even then, the motor is driving the chainring to rotate the chain while the wheel is basically still freewheeling. I'm gonna have to reply to that thread to see what the heck he means.
Regarding the Avinox updates, I occasionally hit the Vital MTB forum and have seen you on there as well. In the tech rumors thread, I saw someone say that DJI/Avinox is extraordinarily strict with their embargos, and that they had actually cancelled an account (presumably a frame or bike company) due to them leaking info on the new motor. Have you (or anyone else on here
) heard anything about that? It would really suck to have tooled up and started producing frames for the Avinox fitment, only to have them tell you the deal is off!- Thread starter
- #173
Whoof, that's brutal. That's hard to imagine because in these companies it could get out to 100 people and they can't control what every person says. Remember when Troydon released his new bikes last month by email and specifically asked no one to announce it publicly and Plummet announced it within 15 minutes online followed by several others.
Haven't heard a thing however in that regard but Francis had the most complete combination of all of the Avinox motor rumors in one place and he has industry connections, but doesn't manufacture bikes.
Haven't heard a thing however in that regard but Francis had the most complete combination of all of the Avinox motor rumors in one place and he has industry connections, but doesn't manufacture bikes.
Plummet
Flash Git
Most reviews i have seen are guys who dont own the bikes and jump on them and ride them for a short time, make some basic adjustments and then call it a comparison. They typically are riding as factory settings rather than optimising the each system for best wh used. That that instance the dji will always loose the "efficiency" test, because its not really an efficiency test at all, more of a algorithm test,
I have seen it multiple, multiple times now. Dji burns more power out of the box, but can be adjusted to equivalent outputs.
- Thread starter
- #176
I mean it's a looker for sure. Doesn't quite work for me for a few reasons (unknown motor reliability/ noise/ service centers, price, too small of a battery, unknown bike brand) and I eagerly await my Wild CX-R 600wh.
However even I acknowledge that my Wild will be outdated right about the time I'm getting it because the Wild with the M2 will be released almost at the same time I receive mine. Based on all the reviews that I've discovered, I feel that the Bosch CXR is a better fit for my needs than the current M1.
I chose to go with what I know right now as opposed to what might happen in the future and I'm content with that decision.
The only bike I did like more, at least the idea of it, was the Rogue with the M2. But it just wasn't meant to be.
Last edited:
Plummet
Flash Git
Yikes, How long before that skinny chainstay snaps like a carrot!
That is event funkier than Pole's contraptions. Some wack geo and ideas going on for sure.
90nm an 400wh is there for a good time not a long time. I enjoy the hell out of my 400wh battery. But wouldn't want that to be my only configuration for the day.
- Thread starter
- #178
Bosch Performance Line CX – In Our big e-Bike Motor Group Test
In Our 2026 Motor Group Test, the Bosch Performance Line CX Motor Goes Head-to-Head With 10 Strong Rivals – Read The Full Review To Find Out How It Fares Against The Competition!
ebike-mtb.com
Bosch Gen5 CX posted now.
Average Motor Efficiency Comparison
(continuous operation, max support, thermal effects included)
| Rank | Motor | Avg Efficiency | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mahle M40 (had derates) | ≈ 80% | Best sustained efficiency; low losses once stabilized |
| 2 | Fazua Ride 60 | ≈ 79% | Very efficient at moderate absolute power |
| 3 | Bosch CX-Race | ≈ 78% | High output with controlled losses |
| 4 | Maxon | ≈ 77% | Strong but higher copper & inverter losses |
| 5 | Bosch CX 5 | ≈ 75% | Efficiency stays flat despite derating |
| 6 | Pinion MGU | ≈ 75% | Gearbox losses offset motor efficiency |
| 7 | Bosch SX | ≈ 73% | Compact/light design prioritizes mass over efficiency |
Although I didn't know for certain, I suspected the CXR motor would be more efficient than the CX (YTBD on the Avinox) due to the ceramic bearings, and since I wanted the lighter slimmer 600w battery, this mattered quite a bit to me.
This is why I had to find a good all-around e-bike with a Bosch CXR and a 600w, that costs less than $15K for my new bike order.
From my perspective, making the smaller (and cheaper!) battery go further combined with built in chain ring protection lowers my real-world weight per meters climbed.
I'll have ChatGPT do that calculation once all motors are published.
Last edited:
I havent looked, but did they use the CX-R on the exact same bike, set setup conditions as the normal CX?Bosch Performance Line CX – In Our big e-Bike Motor Group Test
In Our 2026 Motor Group Test, the Bosch Performance Line CX Motor Goes Head-to-Head With 10 Strong Rivals – Read The Full Review To Find Out How It Fares Against The Competition!
Bosch Gen5 CX posted now.
Average Motor Efficiency Comparison
(continuous operation, max support, thermal effects included)
Rank Motor Avg Efficiency Notes 1 Mahle M40 (had derates) ≈ 80% Best sustained efficiency; low losses once stabilized 2 Fazua Ride 60 ≈ 79% Very efficient at moderate absolute power 3 Bosch CX-Race ≈ 78% High output with controlled losses 4 Maxon ≈ 77% Strong but higher copper & inverter losses 5 Bosch CX 5 ≈ 75% Efficiency stays flat despite derating 6 Pinion MGU ≈ 75% Gearbox losses offset motor efficiency 7 Bosch SX ≈ 73% Compact/light design prioritizes mass over efficiency
Although I didn't know for certain, I suspected the CXR motor would be more efficient than the CX (YTBD on the Avinox) and since I wanted the lighter slimmer 600w battery, this mattered quite a bit to me.
This why I had to find a good all-around e-bike with a Bosch CXR and a 600w, that costs less than $15K for my new bike order.
I think the issue with these is there's so many variables that can distort the results.
- Thread starter
- #180
They attached measuring equipment to a fixed bike in a lab and used machines to apply the 250w pedaling input, then measured battery drain and watts output.
They also removed the motors from the bikes entirely. That's how they got such accurate weights, etc. as well. Notice the CXR is only 90 grams lighter than the CX, not the claimed 150 for example.
I think the Pinion had high efficiency because they somehow bypassed the built-in transmission or maybe chose an efficient gear. See the note that ChatGPT included. I didn't bother reading that particular review because I would not consider that motor anyways.
They also removed the motors from the bikes entirely. That's how they got such accurate weights, etc. as well. Notice the CXR is only 90 grams lighter than the CX, not the claimed 150 for example.
I think the Pinion had high efficiency because they somehow bypassed the built-in transmission or maybe chose an efficient gear. See the note that ChatGPT included. I didn't bother reading that particular review because I would not consider that motor anyways.
Last edited:
