Smart Wheel - hub motor\battery in 1

It's a cool idea. But I fear that there'll be a devil in the details. If the total weight is only 9 lbs, then it's hard to see it having much range at all. Even with the most advanced batteries.

And I'm willing to be that every component will have an astronomical price tag.

But for a rider who's in decent shape and can handle a regular old pedal bicycle, 250 Watts is not bad. It's a helper, not a workhorse. But that's enough.

It's certainly very interesting and it would be great if it becomes a commercial proposition. I also find myself wondering how it all can be fitted into a 9lb package, but then I'm no engineer and beyond the basics electricity has always been somewhat of a mystery for me.
250watts? - i think that should be fine. I've used the same 250watt hub motor for years now on a tricycle and it gets me along just fine. Mind you I'm a skinny vegetarian who doesn't weigh much, so that might have something to do with it.

250 watts is fine in flat terrain where I live. You may need more for the hills in Mass. There was a company that put the batteries in the front hub and the motor in the rear. Putting batteries and a motor in the same hub is quite an accomplishment.

I have to say this motorized electric bicycle kit has me interested on what is to come in the future. I think in the near future our bikes will become much lighter and more efficient.

I heard about this idea several years ago. It will use Lithium ion chemistry not yet available keeping the weight down. They invented one but it cost too much to market.

Its gonna be the algae battery that make it all possible. lol.

Now Currie makes one. Look http://www.monsterscooterparts.com/electron-wheel.html Talk about EZ. You could install one in less than a minute. You don't even need a wrench!

The new Currie wheel looks cool, but I don't think they will get a lot of buyers at a price of $1,000. Its only 24 volt.
The Hilltopper 24v system with LiPo batteries ships for under $600.

And now Ducati has one but from what I can make out it's only offered as a complete bike right now. http://www.freeduck.it/wheel

At first I thought these designs were good but all of them only look good enough for short trips on flat roads. All of them seem underpowered, limited range ( also very exaggerated range claims), overpriced and the Currie version is ugly. The only pro to these designs seems to be the simple install. I'm not so sure having 20lbs spinning in your rear wheel makes for a good ride.
Copenhagen wheel and Smartwheel had big delays on their delivery dates and Copenhagen wheel hasn't meet their release date goals twice now.

That sounds about like what was to be expected. Not to rain on anyone's parade, mind you. I'm all for innovation. But it's almost guaranteed that the first ones will be less than perfect and not cost effective.

Someone might perfect it. Or at least get it close enough. But it's bound to take a bit of time.

And there's always the possibility that someone else will come up with something even better first.

Wouldn't it be heartbreaking to work on something, invest in it and get it almost right only to have someone come up with something that does the same job, only better and cheaper?

I sometimes forget that the newer e-bike kits are designed to attract first time buyers, rather than those of us that are familiar (or jaded) with the realities of low cost electric propulsion.
-Yes, when developing a product like an e-bike kit, there is a point at which you must stop spending money on R&D and begin production for consumer sale if you want to make a profit.
-I currently ride a Currie e-bike kit, and I just don't see the the advantage of the Smart Wheel beyond appearance.

"Yes, when developing a product...., there is a point at which you must stop spending money on R&D and begin production for consumer sale...." --Wheelbender.

You've reminded me of a piece of automotive history that illustrates pretty well just how hard it can be to strike the right balance between product prep and getting it to market. I only learned of this story within the last couple of years. And I don't remember my source. Though it was likely Wikipedia.

Before Henry Ford founded the Ford Motor Company, he'd founded (1903, I think) an earlier company. The name was the Henry Ford Motorcar Co, or something pretty similar. He was only with them for about a half year or so. Because he couldn't get along with the investors. And I understand that the source of trouble between them was that the investors wanted to get something in production and sale in order to start generating some revenues. (It's not an invalid stance, really. Unless they went into it with the understanding that that would take a while and then changed their minds about just what they wanted. That would've been foolish.)

Henry, on the other hand, wanted to perfect a product first. He wanted their car to be 'right' before offering it for sale. When it became clear that they weren't going to get along, I guess, Henry said, "Go to heck!' and went on his way. The remaining investors changed the company's name to Cadillac and proceeded on their way. That's the birth of the company that we know as Cadillac. I'd been aware that they went back a long way. I hadn't been aware that Henry Ford had anything to do with the founding, though.

But think a moment about Henry's insistence on getting a good product built before selling it. Sounds a bit like the Model T, doesn't it? That car went into production in 1908. So it seems fair to suppose that Henry had something like it in mind at this time.

This bit of history doesn't really tell us much about striking the balance between product perfection and sale ASAP, since both companies did actually succeed.

But isn't it strange to think that had Ford and his investors managed to get along better and produce something like the Model T, then the company that we know as Cadillac would have been, in effect, the company that we know as Ford?

The one thing that I've been left wondering about in all of this is; How is it that these people, Ford on the one hand and his investors on the other, entered into an agreement without covering basics such as "How soon do we see a return on investment"? Seems like a lack of due diligence.

Of course Henry, though, is known to have been a genius who was entirely capable of being an oddball and difficult to get along with.

"Craftsmanship a creed, accuracy a law."

Yes sir, it is a little known fact that old Henry was some part of Cadillacs' genesis. Cadillac was awarded for having interchangeable parts before FoMoCo got that recognition. I always wondered how much his theory hung over to produce those results.
Thanks for the write-up!