your patentpending universal design
I’m not sure if there would be a need to. Your motor is fine as-is, isn’t it? Seems pretty solid and cost effective. My motor set will never be $265, unfortunately.
The enclosure will probably be by @psychotiller, but if you wanted to buy one of these decks and give it that amazing enclosure treatment, like your vanguard, this would be a good candidate! If you do it sooner than later, please send me copies 
5 Likes
The only downside to the axle nut is you are limited to a much smaller stator unless you build it inward like Carvon.
I would like to comment further, but I do not think this is the place to do so. It’s amazing how many hub motors popped up in last couple years… I look forward to adding one more to the mix. Keep up the great work, Hummie. Pretty motors.
3 Likes
I’vce read something about the heat issue being fixed, but I can’t find it. Was it something with the bearings? Any idea when the fixed version will be available?
either all belt drive efficiencies were exaggerated or a hub isnt really more efficient. if the weather is ok tomorrow, ill do one round around my favourite lake with max foc speed on my vanguard. thats probably 2km distance, terrain mostly flat, surface pretty good! oh, nvm the lake, there are actually 2 curves that I cant take with max speed. 
guess ill find something else 
might be that people always just read the max values from their gps apps and rarely do max speed measurements over a larger distance as average!
This made my day XD
Nice tests, saw the vids on your youtube channel. Love the quiet one with these geese. Should get a full face helmet for these speeds though!
gave it a topspeed run over a distance of 400m straight, slight wind, measured avg speed back and forth in an upright normal riding stance, i.e. I brought the board up to max speed and pressed “record” in both directions once. before the runs I measured the voltage: 40.2V!
avg speed “->”: 43.4kph avg speed “<-”: 43.4kph
so pretty consistent, also with all other runs I ever did with my vanguard! also, so far I never felt like there was anything holding this motor back - it always goes straight to top speed and stays there. difference of wind in my back vs. wind in my face for example: nada!
now, off to crunch numbers: ESC: VESC in FOC mode, battery limit 50A, motor limit 70A Motor: SK3 6374 168KV Gearing: 16/36T with 15mm belt Wheels: Flywheels 90mm 75A Voltage: 40.2V
Theoretical max speed: 50.9kph @ 6753 motor rpm Average speed: 43.4kph @ 5758 motor rpm
= efficiency of 85.2%
and thats in foc mode that is known to have slightly less top speed, so it compares with your 65% first run.
I now really wonder where this pretty big gap comes from? in theory my board should be a lot worse: extremely soft big urethane chunks vs. hard slim urethane and a gates gt3 15mm belt vs. nothing! 
btw, I carved home after that test and measured the urethane temperature when I stopped at home with a laser temperature gun: 47°C, ambient temperature 23°C.
So I’m at 72% of the noload and ur at 85% to a similar speed.
Actually ur big wheels probably have better rolling resistance. Soft is a good thing as long as it has lots of rebound, especially on a less than smooth surface.
Other than that your motor is much bigger with a stator of 5374 maybe and mine add up to 4750. And then the lack of gearing beyond that. If someone did a test with a similar sized stator without gearing it would be more revealing of the difference between pulley and hub. But your test does show these little motors are being pushed beyond what they’re best at for sure.
Sadly I’ve broken 2 escs in 2 days. One was my old Chaka one on FOC and one of the new ones I just put on from elkick lasted less than 2 charges and that was on bldc! I think they’re “mildly” broken as the Chaka one doesn’t show a failure code.
Didn’t have time to do a temp test. Of course the speed test here didn’t kick it up anything other than warm to the touch. from what I could tell from the short period I was riding the temp takes longer to rise likey partially because of the steel lack decreased thermal conductivity and also maybe the airgap is helping. Have to test more when I can but for shorter hard runs the bell stayed way cooler
you shouldnt compare apples with oranges (bldc vs. foc). to make it comparable, its hub foc 65% vs. belt foc 85% and its pretty much the same topspeed too. if i went BLDC, my top speed would rise for the same voltage and then its probably 92% vs. 72% or so - either way the gap of roughly 20% would probably stay.
but you have 2 hubs and I just have a single motor and your gearing is basically 90KV vs. 168KV? 
got a cycle gps app - when I press start it records distance and speed and when I press stop it tells me max and average. that app was a bit weird though, because the velocity kept “fading in” when I looked at the data. obviously this was bullshit since I hit start when I was at a stationary speed and during the whole run the motor frequency didnt change one bit. my guess is that its some smoothing kalman filter working behind the scenes of that app. I simply checked the speed graph and extracted the last stationary speed, which corresponded pretty much to the max speed (as expected, since my speed simply didnt change in those 400meters). perfectly flat pavement and motor frequency absolutely stable.
thats easy to do when you have 2 guys with the rider going in a circle. where would my fixpoint be when i shoot a video from ego perspective? wont going to happen! also, I really trust gps, so far it has always given me pretty accurate results - I dont know anyone who wouldnt trust a gps distance and speed estimate tbh unless its within the typical gps error of roughly ±12m.
I mean, in the end my 85% just fits what most people have reported so far - I just wanted to make sure that these values were actually correct and not some downhill peak measurements. its in my own interest to be accurate.
on a sidenote: we both base our max theoretical speed on a correct motor kv. did you ever check with vesc live monitor and motor erpm, if your KV value is actually correct?
sorry, I wont enter any discussions about gps measurements. Im working with stock car gps, differential gps and odometry on a daily basis and its more accurate than what we would need it to be here in this case. 
and I measure that distance … with gps? 