Article Video: Teewing Flux 180mm, high-pivot, Avinox EMTB first look and ride

[Astro66]

Went for a ride this morning. I'm stunned how much crisper the shifting is with the SRAM 90 Cage on the Electronic SRAM S1000 AXS derailleur. So I've come home and ordered a spare SRAM 90 Cage with tension spring, from Amazon, for AUD$130.

I'll use it to make the SRAM 90 derailleur whole again. But doubles as a spare for the Flux and my Amflow.

 

[Astro66]

Already had a message back saying its in the works and they don't need to see this frame. So hoping it's done soon (as I need a kit too)

Looks like your little push did the trick Ian. The Wrap is being delivered tomorrow.

 

[sethimus]

Went for a ride this morning. I'm stunned how much crisper the shifting is with the SRAM 90 Cage on the Electronic SRAM S1000 AXS derailleur. So I've come home and ordered a spare SRAM 90 Cage with tension spring, from Amazon, for AUD$130.

I'll use it to make the SRAM 90 derailleur whole again. But doubles as a spare for the Flux and my Amflow.

View attachment 186661

eagle 90 has an aluminium inner cage, the gx one is steel:

gx should be way more durable as all the other inner cages

 

[mike425]

Just had a read through this thread. On one of the photos shared, it's showing that the Teewing frame is "category 4". How come with this amount of travel they aren't getting them rated at cat 5?

 

[sethimus]

Just had a read through this thread. On one of the photos shared, it's showing that the Teewing frame is "category 4". How come with this amount of travel they aren't getting them rated at cat 5?

motor is only astm 4 rated

 

[Astro66]

eagle 90 has an aluminium inner cage, the gx one is steel:

View attachment 186673
View attachment 186674
gx should be way more durable as all the other inner cages

Ta.

I've also swapped the spring on the bent cage over to a spare GX Cage I had. So I'll have a spare GX cage, as well the SRAM 90 Cage and spring.

I was thinking about straightening the cage. But I can get them for AUD$44, so didn't think it was worth it. I am a very particular about my shifting, and would only accept perfect shifting, and didn't think I would get this with a straightened cage.

 

[sethimus]

Ta.

I've also swapped the spring on the bent cage over to a spare GX Cage I had. So I'll have a spare GX cage, as well the SRAM 90 Cage and spring.

View attachment 186675


I was thinking about straightening the cage. But I can get them for AUD$44, so didn't think it was worth it. I am a very particular about my shifting, and would only accept perfect shifting, and didn't think I would get this with a straightened cage.

i hit mine at least 3x in finale (mullet, fuck yeah). i only needed to readjust the shifting in the app via micro adjustment. last one was the biggest correction down to 8 from position 18

 

[maddchadd]

Would one of you lucky ducks that already got a Large Flux built up help me out and measure the wheelbase in the long chain stay mode? Or even short chain stay would be fine if thats how you have it set up. MBR measured the turbo force 10mm longer than stated by teewing so I'm wondering if thats also the case with the flux. At 6'3" I should probably be on an xl but have learned on some of my local trails (tight tech) anything too far beyond 1300mm wheelbase gets tricky to maneuver.

 

[B Rabbit]

Would one of you lucky ducks that already got a Large Flux built up help me out and measure the wheelbase in the long chain stay mode? Or even short chain stay would be fine if thats how you have it set up. MBR measured the turbo force 10mm longer than stated by teewing so I'm wondering if thats also the case with the flux. At 6'3" I should probably be on an xl but have learned on some of my local trails (tight tech) anything too far beyond 1300mm wheelbase gets tricky to maneuver.

Large running 29 is Est- 1295mm

 

[Astro66]

i hit mine at least 3x in finale (mullet, fuck yeah). i only needed to readjust the shifting in the app via micro adjustment. last one was the biggest correction down to 8 from position 18

This was bent so bad, there was no adjusting it out with the Micro-adjust. When I tried, the cage started hitting the spokes. As an experiment, when I have time, I might try straightening it, fitting it, and see what the shifting is like.

 

[xtraman122]

Just had a read through this thread. On one of the photos shared, it's showing that the Teewing frame is "category 4". How come with this amount of travel they aren't getting them rated at cat 5?

Like was said, the motor only has a cat 4 rating which is why the frame has that on the sticker, but Teewing claims the frame itself is actually tested to cat 5 standards.

 

[maddchadd]

Large running 29 is Est- 1295mm

Thanks! Thats what I was worried about, the XL being over 1330mm wheelbase

 

[B Rabbit]

Thanks! Thats what I was worried about, the XL being over 1330mm wheelbase

If my dodgy measuring is accurate that puts the wheel base at 1320 as the reach from L to XL grows 25mm
At 6.3 I think the seated position is going to feel fairly cramped on a L, but these the breaks!

 

[JP-NZ]

Like was said, the motor only has a cat 4 rating which is why the frame has that on the sticker, but Teewing claims the frame itself is actually tested to cat 5 standards.

I wonder what differences there are in the motors considering the Velduro Rouge will be cat 5 rated?

 

[xtraman122]

I wonder what differences there are in the motors considering the Velduro Rouge will be cat 5 rated?

That’s interesting, definitely nothing different in their motors. Avinox classifies the motor as cat 4, doesn’t matter for who, but they all obviously make their own frames. The Teewing is a cat 5 frame but apparently label the bike as cat 4 since that’s the weakest component of what they’re putting on there.

 

[maddchadd]

If my dodgy measuring is accurate that puts the wheel base at 1320 as the reach from L to XL grows 25mm
At 6.3 I think the seated position is going to feel fairly cramped on a L, but these the breaks!

Large Flux is quoted at 1281.4mm in 29er and you measured 1295 so almost 14mm difference. XL is quoted at 1317.6mm so if it also ends up being 14mm longer that will put it over 1330mm. Reach isn't ideal on the large for me I know that but the wheelbase on the XL could make certain trails almost unrideable. I've been there done that and would prefer a shorter reach to a bike that physically can't make turns on trails I regularly ride without a nosey

 

[TheKaiser]

That’s interesting, definitely nothing different in their motors. Avinox classifies the motor as cat 4, doesn’t matter for who, but they all obviously make their own frames. The Teewing is a cat 5 frame but apparently label the bike as cat 4 since that’s the weakest component of what they’re putting on there.

This is all speculation on my part, but the only tangible difference I could imagine between the motor setup on a Teewing and Velduro Rogue would be if they use different mounting hardware. We did just hear that there was a recall/running change to the hardware Teewing was using, so perhaps the Rogue has some heavier duty bolts or something like that. If the mounting hardware was what wouldn't pass Cat 5 then that could account for the difference....or perhaps Velduro is just quoting figures for the frame itself and conveniently leaving out the fact that the motor is only Cat 4, in which case I say credit to Teewing for transparency.

 

[sethimus]

so far the rogue rating hasn’t changed and judging by velduros information policy won’t change in the future either

 

[B Rabbit]

Hey team,
I'm pretty sure my idler is off about 1-3mm to the chainring, I am using a direct mount Helix R 8mm offset not the spider that was provided. I've pulled the idler back apart and re-installed it to no change, I’ve taken the chainring off and checked it is the 8mm offset for Avinox and reinstalled, no change.
It’s pretty noticeable from the top down view but I can’t get it to show in photos clearly.

How do peoples chainrings look in relation to their idlers? Perfectly straight or can you see a slight deviation in the chain?

Photo for kicks

 

[xtraman122]

This is all speculation on my part, but the only tangible difference I could imagine between the motor setup on a Teewing and Velduro Rogue would be if they use different mounting hardware. We did just hear that there was a recall/running change to the hardware Teewing was using, so perhaps the Rogue has some heavier duty bolts or something like that. If the mounting hardware was what wouldn't pass Cat 5 then that could account for the difference....or perhaps Velduro is just quoting figures for the frame itself and conveniently leaving out the fact that the motor is only Cat 4, in which case I say credit to Teewing for transparency.

I can’t actually find any official docs where DJI/Avinox provide an ASTM rating for the motor. People say it online but I can’t find the source.

This seems to be the main source of the Flux being a Cat 5 rated frame but the overall bike being derated due to other components. Maybe it’s actually wheels or the fork or something and not the motor, who knows.

Teewing Launches the Flux One eMTB

theloamwolf.com

“While the Teewing Flux Frame is tested and rated to CAT 5 standards, some of the complete bike components are CAT 4 level. This iswhy Flux frames are labelled as CAT 4 and complete bikes are only CAT 4 rated.”

 

[B Rabbit]

So, more on the slight chain misalignment, its definitely not the chain ring, its measures at exactly 55mm from the center of the motor.

Here you can just make out the chain shifting over to meet the idler, i'm guessing 2mm

Slightly out of ideas at this point, there really isnt any room/spacers to remove to pull the idler inbound more, and from memory the idler gear is symmetrical aka no offset so flipping it over might not make any difference, but either way it went back on how it can from factory, with the white writing "18T" on the outside. The only option I can see if pulling the whole link off and making sure everything is sat correctly, but im pretty sure it is.
How much of an issue this is remains to be seen, but its only going to increase any wear and add noise...

Edit- obviously easily solved if you are running a spider as you could space the chainring out

Edit 2- I should also add, this was a frame kit and I did pull the whole thing apart to install a diy ride wrap, so there is every potential it’s a mistake I have made during reassembly , but I just cant see what that could be at this point.

 

[b1337]

So, more on the slight chain misalignment, its definitely not the chain ring, its measures at exactly 55mm from the center of the motor.
View attachment 186811

View attachment 186812

Here you can just make out the chain shifting over to meet the idler, i'm guessing 2mm

View attachment 186813

Slightly out of ideas at this point, there really isnt any room/spacers to remove to pull the idler inbound more, and from memory the idler gear is symmetrical aka no offset so flipping it over might not make any difference, but either way it went back on how it can from factory, with the white writing "18T" on the outside. The only option I can see if pulling the whole link off and making sure everything is sat correctly, but im pretty sure it is.
How much of an issue this is remains to be seen, but its only going to increase any wear and add noise...

Edit- obviously easily solved if you are running a spider as you could space the chainring out

Edit 2- I should also add, this was a frame kit and I did pull the whole thing apart to install a diy ride wrap, so there is every potential it’s a mistake I have made during reassembly , but I just cant see what that could be at this point.

just ride it hard and let us know in a few weeks

 

[B Rabbit]

just ride it hard and let us know in a few weeks

Appreciate the sentiment but riding it hard ain’t gunna make the pulley/chainring align correctly
But I’m riding it hard either way

 

[Astro66]

So this is the gap between my motor and chainring on the Flux

This is the same gap on my Amflow.

Using the chain width as perspective. It does appear the chain line on the Flux is slightly further out. So the spider might have a different offset on the Flux, to accomodate the idler.

As best I can tell, the chainline between the idler and chainring on my Flux looks straight.

But something I noticed right away. The cross chaining from the idler to 1st gear on the cassette, was more on the Flux, compared to the Amflow. Once again leading me to the conclusion the chainline at the chainring, is further out on the Flux, than my Amflow. Probably to accommodate the idler.

If your idler is sitting even further out, due to something not right when you reassembled. This would be making this cross chaining issue worse.

If the offset of the chainring you installed is narrower. This would make the cross chaining between the chainring and idler also worse.

 

[B Rabbit]

So this is the gap between my motor and chainring on the Flux

View attachment 186820
This is the same gap on my Amflow.

View attachment 186821
Using the chain width as perspective. It does appear the chain line on the Flux is slightly further out. So the spider might have a different offset on the Flux, to accomodate the idler.

As best I can tell, the chainline between the idler and chainring on my Flux looks straight.

But something I noticed right away. The cross chaining from the idler to 1st gear on the cassette, was more on the Flux, compared to the Amflow. Once again leading me to the conclusion the chainline at the chainring, is further out on the Flux, than my Amflow. Probably to accommodate the idler.

If your idler is sitting even further out, due to something not right when you reassembled. This would be making this cross chaining issue worse.

If the offset of the chainring you installed is narrower. This would make the cross chaining between the chainring and idler also worse.

Can you measure how far out the center of your chainring is from the middle of the motor? Mine is 55mm exactly

 

[TheKaiser]

So, more on the slight chain misalignment, its definitely not the chain ring, its measures at exactly 55mm from the center of the motor.
View attachment 186811

View attachment 186812

Here you can just make out the chain shifting over to meet the idler, i'm guessing 2mm

View attachment 186813

Slightly out of ideas at this point, there really isnt any room/spacers to remove to pull the idler inbound more, and from memory the idler gear is symmetrical aka no offset so flipping it over might not make any difference, but either way it went back on how it can from factory, with the white writing "18T" on the outside. The only option I can see if pulling the whole link off and making sure everything is sat correctly, but im pretty sure it is.
How much of an issue this is remains to be seen, but its only going to increase any wear and add noise...

Edit- obviously easily solved if you are running a spider as you could space the chainring out

Edit 2- I should also add, this was a frame kit and I did pull the whole thing apart to install a diy ride wrap, so there is every potential it’s a mistake I have made during reassembly , but I just cant see what that could be at this point.

Do you also still have that gap between the idler bolt head and the frame that you showed us in post #651? If no one else has that gap, AND your idler spacing seems to be off, that does seem like a suspicious combo of observations given that they're at the same frame location, but I am have never seen how that whole assembly goes together. From what you're saying, the idler is snug, with no wiggle room, so it is doesn't really sound like the bolt simply leaving room for it to slide out of place, but that bolt head situation still leaves me with some doubts. I know you said you checked the bolt torque, but can you tell what the bolt is tightening against? If the head is not tightening against the frame, is there a step on the bolt shaft that tightens against the pulley's inner race?

Just a couple ideas are:
- Can the community help out by having anyone else here with a Flux measure their pulley's chainline (distance from bike centerline)?
- Can Teewing provide a spec for what the pulley's chainline should be?

If the seat tube is centered on the bike, then it should be easy to measure, but if the seat tube is offset (I still haven't seen one in person) then it can be a bit tricky.

Your idea about a separate spider and ring allowing spacer adjustment would be a good fallback plan, but it would be nice not to have to do that, given that it might have knock on effects on the lower chain in the bigger cogs if you make that angle too acute.

On demand manufacturing is starting to get really reasonable in cost. I'd wondered about the possibility of getting pulleys made if Teewing stopped production, or if I wanted steel rather than aluminum for better durability. It seems like if this is a chronic problem with all of these bikes, a run of offset pulleys would be a pretty easy fix if Teewing doesn't step up with something more comprehensive.

 

[B Rabbit]

Teewing state the chainline is 55mm, which mine is exactly to the chainring (from the center of the motor), but I dont think I can accurately measure the pulleys chainline measurement.

 

[TheKaiser]

Teewing state the chainline is 55mm, which mine is exactly to the chainring (from the center of the motor), but I dont think I can accurately measure the pulleys chainline measurement.

Yeah, I've learned the hard way that what seems like a simple thing to determine can prove to be pretty difficult in practice.

Does it seem like the seat tube is centered, relative to the motor? I see there are obstructions due to the way the swingarm captures the pulley, but I was thinking that if you had a digital caliper you might be able to use the internal measurement point on either the pulley or seat tube centerline, and the external measurement side on the other one. Hopefully that makes sense.

Also, just to confirm, do you still have that bolt head gap, and could you tell what sort of stop the bolt was tightening against?

Either way, I'm very glad to hear that your bike still functions fine! It's sometimes tough to tell how much to sweat the small stuff, but in this case, you can keep enjoying the bike while seeing if there is perhaps some room for further optimization.

 

[B Rabbit]

Yeah, I've learned the hard way that what seems like a simple thing to determine can prove to be pretty difficult in practice.

Does it seem like the seat tube is centered, relative to the motor? I see there are obstructions due to the way the swingarm captures the pulley, but I was thinking that if you had a digital caliper you might be able to use the internal measurement point on either the pulley or seat tube centerline, and the external measurement side on the other one. Hopefully that makes sense.

Also, just to confirm, do you still have that bolt head gap, and could you tell what sort of stop the bolt was tightening against?

Either way, I'm very glad to hear that your bike still functions fine! It's sometimes tough to tell how much to sweat the small stuff, but in this case, you can keep enjoying the bike while seeing if there is perhaps some room for further optimization.

Just wanted to make sure a) I hadnt f'd up or b) there is a slight compatibility issue with direct mount chainrings, in which case it might save other people some hassle
I can measure the pulleys chainline using the mudguard bolt holes to find the center, but I dont think its quite accurate enough.

That little gap is 99% gone upon reinstall and torquing down
Ill monitor the wear on the pulley and chainring, might even pick up a chain ring and test how it fits using the supplied spider
Yeah, the bike rips, i love it Every time I ride up a hill I laugh out loud, its insane!

Got some Oneup 50mm bars on the way, as well as a new 45mm stem and new pulley wheels for the derailleur. Still waiting for my spesh radial tires to come in....

 

[B Rabbit]

FYI, not sure if it been mentioned before but for those in Australia it looks like Pushys has stock of Ride Wrap kits for the Flux, only in large.