Levo Gen 4 Specialized Gen 4 Levo - Official Thread

Torquing bolts today I noticed what appears to be a missing bolt, as it’s an empty threaded hole in my motor. However the Levo owners manual says absolutely nothing about this location.
Can someone confirm they have a bolt in this hole on their Levo?
Nope, there is no bolt in this mounting hole by default in the original factory spec.

There are actually two M6-threaded mounting holes on the side of the motor, but only one is used for the standard chainguide. The other one is optional, for example if someone wants to install a different type of chainguide that includes a bash guard.

1766945675715.png

1766945703459.png
 
⚡ EMTB Pro Go Pro — exclusive discounts & ad-free Peaty's 25% off & more · Ad-free browsing · Pro badge See the deals →
In New Jerzy how often are you on the 3 largest cogs?
It’s northern New Jersey and you would be surprised. An average 20 mile ride is usually 2500 feet of climbing. There is very little flat riding, you are either on short punchie climbs or short steep descents. I usually do most of my rides in economy or trail mode. Also most of the trails are pretty much rubble piles, not a whole lot of flow trails. Big cogs are your friends.
 
I want to go back to a point that, in my opinion, is the real problem of this bike.
For everything else, I am fine with it, but the power delivery of this motor is very bad and it is driving me crazy.

My main issue is that the motor pushes too much even at 10% support.
To fix this, I contacted Specialized Italy customer service. They suggested installing a smaller front chainring (32 teeth).

After installing it, I found out that it was not compatible:
in some gear combinations, the motor shuts down.

After many complaints, it turned out that this was a known bug.
In the meantime, I had already spent time and money on this modification.

So I reinstalled the original chainring and limited the bike to 30% support just to be able to reach more than 2000 m of elevation gain.

By analyzing the Specialized app logs (attached file purple line is motor power, pink is my legs), I noticed that the assistance is no longer progressive, but basically on/off.
This happens because I am almost always using the maximum available motor power, which is around 220 W.

All of this could be solved very easily by Specialized:

  • allow a minimum support lower than 10%, for example 5%, or
  • even better, after 10%, allow 1% steps instead of fixed jumps.
I honestly do not understand how an app like BLEvo, created by a single developer and now no longer supported, could be so much better than the official app made by a large company like Specialized.

Screenshot_20251231-120152.png
 
When the system detects a 1:1 ratio between the chainring and cassette (32/32), it gives an error – this happened to me too – maybe they'll fix it with the new update. In the meantime, I installed the 30T and solved it.
 
So I reinstalled the original chainring and limited the bike to 30% support just to be able to reach more than 2000 m of elevation gain.
Not trying be to sarcastic, but a RE could be the perfect upgrade for your epic rides?
 
I want to go back to a point that, in my opinion, is the real problem of this bike.
For everything else, I am fine with it, but the power delivery of this motor is very bad and it is driving me crazy.

My main issue is that the motor pushes too much even at 10% support.
To fix this, I contacted Specialized Italy customer service. They suggested installing a smaller front chainring (32 teeth).

After installing it, I found out that it was not compatible:
in some gear combinations, the motor shuts down.

After many complaints, it turned out that this was a known bug.
In the meantime, I had already spent time and money on this modification.

So I reinstalled the original chainring and limited the bike to 30% support just to be able to reach more than 2000 m of elevation gain.

By analyzing the Specialized app logs (attached file purple line is motor power, pink is my legs), I noticed that the assistance is no longer progressive, but basically on/off.
This happens because I am almost always using the maximum available motor power, which is around 220 W.

All of this could be solved very easily by Specialized:

  • allow a minimum support lower than 10%, for example 5%, or
  • even better, after 10%, allow 1% steps instead of fixed jumps.
I honestly do not understand how an app like BLEvo, created by a single developer and now no longer supported, could be so much better than the official app made by a large company like Specialized.

View attachment 173404
What ease/motor power setting was that ride done at? (i.e. 10/10, 10/30, etc).

It doesn't make sense to me that the motor would have a minimum output of 220w. If you set the max power to 10% you should only get a max output of 66w/72w surely?
 
I want to go back to a point that, in my opinion, is the real problem of this bike.
For everything else, I am fine with it, but the power delivery of this motor is very bad and it is driving me crazy.

My main issue is that the motor pushes too much even at 10% support.
To fix this, I contacted Specialized Italy customer service. They suggested installing a smaller front chainring (32 teeth).

After installing it, I found out that it was not compatible:
in some gear combinations, the motor shuts down.

After many complaints, it turned out that this was a known bug.
In the meantime, I had already spent time and money on this modification.

So I reinstalled the original chainring and limited the bike to 30% support just to be able to reach more than 2000 m of elevation gain.

By analyzing the Specialized app logs (attached file purple line is motor power, pink is my legs), I noticed that the assistance is no longer progressive, but basically on/off.
This happens because I am almost always using the maximum available motor power, which is around 220 W.

All of this could be solved very easily by Specialized:

  • allow a minimum support lower than 10%, for example 5%, or
  • even better, after 10%, allow 1% steps instead of fixed jumps.
I honestly do not understand how an app like BLEvo, created by a single developer and now no longer supported, could be so much better than the official app made by a large company like Specialized.

View attachment 173404
Show us a screenshot of your eco/trail/turbo settings.
 
I want to go back to a point that, in my opinion, is the real problem of this bike.
For everything else, I am fine with it, but the power delivery of this motor is very bad and it is driving me crazy.

My main issue is that the motor pushes too much even at 10% support.
To fix this, I contacted Specialized Italy customer service. They suggested installing a smaller front chainring (32 teeth).

After installing it, I found out that it was not compatible:
in some gear combinations, the motor shuts down.

After many complaints, it turned out that this was a known bug.
In the meantime, I had already spent time and money on this modification.

So I reinstalled the original chainring and limited the bike to 30% support just to be able to reach more than 2000 m of elevation gain.

By analyzing the Specialized app logs (attached file purple line is motor power, pink is my legs), I noticed that the assistance is no longer progressive, but basically on/off.
This happens because I am almost always using the maximum available motor power, which is around 220 W.

All of this could be solved very easily by Specialized:

  • allow a minimum support lower than 10%, for example 5%, or
  • even better, after 10%, allow 1% steps instead of fixed jumps.
I honestly do not understand how an app like BLEvo, created by a single developer and now no longer supported, could be so much better than the official app made by a large company like Specialized.

View attachment 173404
It's pretty clear by now that the new Brose motor is quite energy-hungry compared to the previous one, but the (simple) reason is that it provides more assistance to the cyclist, and that comes at a price. Personally, I also hope the new firmware allows for finer adjustments of the effort required to reach maximum power (1-2-3-4-5/100) because this would save energy even if it would require greater muscular effort. For now, I've chosen ECO 10/80, TRAIL 45/90, and TURBO 60/100 with AUTO—with all other options set to minimum or zero. With this, I can climb 1,800-2,000 meters, which is usually enough for me. We'll see what the future holds...
 
Not trying be to sarcastic, but a RE could be the perfect upgrade for your epic rides?
makes the bike heavier and raises center of gravity. I'm trying to raise awareness for years that full power rigs are getting too powerful and heavy for lighter riders and if you can't save battery it will suck because then you have to carry a a huge battery and a range extender which sucks for handling. And light ebikes often won't get you enough range even with the range extender.

That's why I will probably get a bosch bike. For me range is way more important than power.
 
The STFU guides are awesome. Honestly I wasn’t really complaining about chain slap, but now that I put the guides on I realize how much noise was there. There’s effectively zero chain noise now. Considering how inexpensive they are; I have no reservations about giving them my full endorsement.

View attachment 168770
I agree with this. Just did my first ride with the STFU on and it did exactly that. Couldn’t ever hear my chain at all. I’m a new believer. I’ll be ordering one for my other ebike.
 
I don't have much need for the fast charging capability of the Smart Charger, but I like its ability to slow charge. Not enough to spend $600 though!
 
Not trying be to sarcastic, but a RE could be the perfect upgrade for your epic rides?
It could be an idea, but the range extender is not free, and for me it is very expensive for what it offers. I want a bike that is easier to pedal. I want to use a custom setting and, with some simple calculations, for me a support level between 5% and 8% would be perfect. In my opinion, with this bike and this software, Specialized is disappointing long-time customers: people who enjoy pedaling but still want a little help
What ease/motor power setting was that ride done at? (i.e. 10/10, 10/30, etc).

It doesn't make sense to me that the motor would have a minimum output of 220w. If you set the max power to 10% you should only get a max output of 66w/72w surely?
Hi, sorry, I didn’t explain myself well. That ride I posted the screenshot of was at 10/30.
Show us a screenshot of your eco/trail/turbo settings.
ECO 10/30, TRAIL 10/80, and TURBO 60/100 with AUTO- with all other options set to minimum or zero.
 
That sprag looks pretty corroded to me. Bad sealing from the elements?

Just the usual Brose engineering stuffs....

I guess they had a big party at the Brose headquarters after they sucessfully sold the ebike division to Yamaha..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It could be an idea, but the range extender is not free, and for me it is very expensive for what it offers. I want a bike that is easier to pedal. I want to use a custom setting and, with some simple calculations, for me a support level between 5% and 8% would be perfect. In my opinion, with this bike and this software, Specialized is disappointing long-time customers: people who enjoy pedaling but still want a little help

Hi, sorry, I didn’t explain myself well. That ride I posted the screenshot of was at 10/30.

ECO 10/30, TRAIL 10/80, and TURBO 60/100 with AUTO- with all other options set to minimum or zero.
Maybe I am not understanding your original concern, but you have the bike set at 10/30 and so the bike can still access 30% of it total power. The 10 is ease of access meaning how hard you need to pedal to access the 30% of total power. The issue is its all cadence driven so if you downshift to a lower gear to make the climb easier then the RPMs will naturally rise and quickly give you access to the full 30%. if you selected a higher gear then you would input more power to access the full 30% power. I feel like the real issue is there are diminishing returns at the lower power settings, as the bb (aa/bb) lowers below 30% I really start to feel the weight of the bike on steep climbs (know this will differ by fitness levels), below 15% I feel like my analog stumpy climbs easier than the Levo.

Regardless, if you want to lower the bikes power out / battery consumption your gonna need to drop below 30% to maybe 20% on less aggressive climbs. Because as you can see that the bike is still giving you 200+ watts for ~120 watts of your leg input. I don't know about you but a 120 watts FTP is pretty low to hold for 320 +watts combined. Which makes me think the % settings for ease of access are not high enough to force you to input more self power and conserve battery.

My best personal example of this was I had a similar setting of 10/30 and rode 15 miles of flat trail. My FTP at the time was around 260, so I was blown away at the end of the ride when I was that I was averaging 180 watts from my legs and and like 230 watts from the bike (combined 410 watts). So I was 80 watts below my FTP and but moving at 250 watts faster then my FTP... WTF right. And like you I was unhappy with the battery consumption considering I felt like the bike was so tuned down. For me to match my analog bike output I need to drop the bike to 10/15 ... but why?? I didn't buy an eMTB to go the same speed or slower.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I am not understanding your original concern, but you have the bike set at 10/30 and so the bike can still access 30% of it total power. The 10 is ease of access meaning how hard you need to pedal to access the 30% of total power. The issue is its all cadence driven so if you downshift to a lower gear to make the climb easier then the RPMs will naturally rise and quickly give you access to the full 30%. if you selected a higher gear then you would input more power to access the full 30% power. I feel like the real issue is there are diminishing returns at the lower power settings, as the bb (aa/bb) lowers below 30% I really start to feel the weight of the bike on steep climbs (know this will differ by fitness levels), below 15% I feel like my analog stumpy climbs easier than the Levo.

Regardless, if you want to lower the bikes power out / battery consumption your gonna need to drop below 30% to maybe 20% on less aggressive climbs. Because as you can see that the bike is still giving you 200+ watts for ~120 watts of your leg input. I don't know about you but a 120 watts FTP is pretty low to hold for 320 +watts combined. Which makes me think the % settings for ease of access are not high enough to force you to input more self power and conserve battery.

My best personal example of this was I had a similar setting of 10/30 and rode 15 miles of flat trail. My FTP at the time was around 260, so I was blown away at the end of the ride when I was that I was averaging 180 watts from my legs and and like 230 watts from the bike (combined 410 watts). So I was 80 watts below my FTP and but moving at 250 watts faster then my FTP... WTF right. And like you I was unhappy with the battery consumption considering I felt like the bike was so tuned down. For me to match my analog bike output I need to drop the bike to 10/15 ... but why?? I didn't buy an eMTB to go the same speed or slower.
I would love to hold 260 W for 5 hours, but my training level and my schedule don’t allow me to train that hard to reach that goal.


My criticism is different. With 10% ease of access and 30% max power, I (and the group of 6 Turbo Levos I ride with) lose progression in the assistance. The motor behavior becomes almost on/off: we reach the bike’s maximum support too early.


With 10% ease of access, the bike gives roughly a multiplication factor of about 1.5–2x. For example, if I push 150 W, the bike already gives around 220 W. This means that with very little leg power we quickly reach the maximum assistance allowed by the 30% cap. It feels like “all or nothing”.


What many people are asking Specialized in forums is to reduce this multiplication factor, meaning the ability to lower ease of access below 10% (for example 9–8–7–6–5, etc.).

What I really need is a lower multiplication factor. For my fitness level, something between 1.0x and 1.2x, but with maximum power fully available.
This way, most of the time the bike would feel natural and pedal-driven, but in the rare moments when I really need power, I want to have all the power available.

On flat terrain I don’t need the motor to push me 2x. But on steep climbs, when my legs are pushing 300 W, I may need more than the 220 W the motor can give, because I limited max power to 30% to save battery.
 
I wish we had mid power ebikes for lighter and fitter riders that would be really light and would handle well but still had the power when you need it.
 
I would love to hold 260 W for 5 hours, but my training level and my schedule don’t allow me to train that hard to reach that goal.


My criticism is different. With 10% ease of access and 30% max power, I (and the group of 6 Turbo Levos I ride with) lose progression in the assistance. The motor behavior becomes almost on/off: we reach the bike’s maximum support too early.


With 10% ease of access, the bike gives roughly a multiplication factor of about 1.5–2x. For example, if I push 150 W, the bike already gives around 220 W. This means that with very little leg power we quickly reach the maximum assistance allowed by the 30% cap. It feels like “all or nothing”.


What many people are asking Specialized in forums is to reduce this multiplication factor, meaning the ability to lower ease of access below 10% (for example 9–8–7–6–5, etc.).

What I really need is a lower multiplication factor. For my fitness level, something between 1.0x and 1.2x, but with maximum power fully available.
This way, most of the time the bike would feel natural and pedal-driven, but in the rare moments when I really need power, I want to have all the power available.

On flat terrain I don’t need the motor to push me 2x. But on steep climbs, when my legs are pushing 300 W, I may need more than the 220 W the motor can give, because I limited max power to 30% to save battery.
I completely understand your position and fully agree. However, using 10/80 allows you to achieve good efficiency on most mountain roads, reaching 2,000 meters of elevation gain, and above all, without losing that dynamic effect you mention. I hope Specialized has considered this with the new firmware...
 
I completely understand your position and fully agree. However, using 10/80 allows you to achieve good efficiency on most mountain roads, reaching 2,000 meters of elevation gain, and above all, without losing that dynamic effect you mention. I hope Specialized has considered this with the new firmware...
How many km 10/80?
 
I completely understand your position and fully agree. However, using 10/80 allows you to achieve good efficiency on most mountain roads, reaching 2,000 meters of elevation gain, and above all, without losing that dynamic effect you mention. I hope Specialized has considered this with the new firmware...
Restricting it to 80% is about the same as the gen3. So should feel the same as a gen 3 on 20/100
 
Isn’t there a 0/100 setting in the dynamic microtone mode that still provides motor assist? Perhaps that is an option.
 
Don’t want to open a can of worms here especially with that one guy who lives in the Levo threads just to say he hates it but…had my Levo just over a month now after having a Amflow.



Decided to swap as I found the Amflow to large in XL and prefer a smaller bike. I could either get a large Amflow or change brands. I’ve owned every Levo/SL since the first one so thought I’d return. My dealer gave me a deal that meant I hardly lost any money and the Amflow was super easy to sell as everyone wants one.



Motor difference was huge the Avinox system is better, cleaner and the battery drained alot slower. I still ride with my friend who has a amflow and we drain similar yet he’ll be using more power. Both same weight and height. Fast charging also is greatly missed and the Avinox system is silent compared to the spesh.



However I’ve rode both bikes now on everying. I mainly like steep off pieste stuff and a bit of bike park wales mostly tech red/blacks and a few jump trails.



This for me is where Levo has come in, for me the actual bike not the motor system is leagues ahead. The 4 is so confidence inspiring and grounded. It’s def more of a truck than the amflow, normally I’d always lean more towards the agile whippet but the stability and confidence the Levo 4 gives it a bigger advantage on more “spicy” trails.



The amflow can def do it and I’ve rode that down some stuff it’s not meant for but for me the Levo bike package wins by loads.



It is hard letting go of the Avinox system and for me who is more battery life than speed conscious I do miss the superior battery management and charging. However I don’t miss the actual bike at all.



I’ll await amflow man’s wrath 😂
 
Don’t want to open a can of worms here especially with that one guy who lives in the Levo threads just to say he hates it but…had my Levo just over a month now after having a Amflow.



Decided to swap as I found the Amflow to large in XL and prefer a smaller bike. I could either get a large Amflow or change brands. I’ve owned every Levo/SL since the first one so thought I’d return. My dealer gave me a deal that meant I hardly lost any money and the Amflow was super easy to sell as everyone wants one.



Motor difference was huge the Avinox system is better, cleaner and the battery drained alot slower. I still ride with my friend who has a amflow and we drain similar yet he’ll be using more power. Both same weight and height. Fast charging also is greatly missed and the Avinox system is silent compared to the spesh.



However I’ve rode both bikes now on everying. I mainly like steep off pieste stuff and a bit of bike park wales mostly tech red/blacks and a few jump trails.



This for me is where Levo has come in, for me the actual bike not the motor system is leagues ahead. The 4 is so confidence inspiring and grounded. It’s def more of a truck than the amflow, normally I’d always lean more towards the agile whippet but the stability and confidence the Levo 4 gives it a bigger advantage on more “spicy” trails.



The amflow can def do it and I’ve rode that down some stuff it’s not meant for but for me the Levo bike package wins by loads.



It is hard letting go of the Avinox system and for me who is more battery life than speed conscious I do miss the superior battery management and charging. However I don’t miss the actual bike at all.



I’ll await amflow man’s wrath 😂
I’m with you on this! I ordered an Amflow and it was a joke getting actually hold of the bike I’d paid for! In the end I cancelled the order and Rich from Raceco (pre Amflow franchise) sorted me out a killer deal on a Levo4. It’s certainly not as a refined power plant as the DJI, not by a long stretch. The bike is power hungry, but the chassis is fantastic. A very well sorted bike indeed. Let down by the stupidly cheap heavy components, which I’m working my way through to lighten the bike slightly. Which reminds me, I was recommended the new Radial gravity Mary and Eddy Current tyres! Having ridden with the Old Mary and Betty combo! I need to switch that radial crap out. I can’t bloody stand them and I can only think my Levo will feel even better with the “right” shoes fitted
 
Keep reading
    Browse all

    Similar Threads

    Community Stats

    Since 2018
    668K
    Messages
    40,742
    Members
    Join 30,000+ Riders, it's free!
    Back
    Top