Kenevo SL Official 2022 Kenevo SL (KSL) Megathread!

[p3eps]

I’m sure I read the SL1 morors produce more then the quoted powers from day 1 but for reference my KSL spits about 50v@ 6 amps so according to my above equation around 300w. This was on a short 100m climb in the second biggest cog.
I am going to try pick up a bike this week and get a proper reading of both my KSL and a Gen 2 on a steep ass climb to get a longer more thorough reading.

I've got quite a steep hill 2 mins from my house that goes on for about 1/3rd of a mile, so I'll try a couple of variants up that tonight and record the screen.
2nd largest cog at a decent cadence, and then try hammering up it as fast as I can.

I've also got a TV / Satellite tower hill a few miles away with a road up it - which is a 15-20% gradient the whole way up - that I can try later on in the week if need be!

 

[Ribinrobin]

Have you ridden the enduro? Looks like the lower pivot is a lot further forward than on the ksl, wondering how it compares

I own a 2021 model! done everything on it parks, races, xc rides! I only have brief experience on the kenevo sl but it just feels like a heavier enduro and it isnt as playful as the normal one.

 

[Zimmerframe]

So we're trying to see if the SL1.2 delivers the 320W it's claimed to? The SL1.1 was 240W?

If you already have the output from your 1.1 motor, how many Watts did you see from it?

In the early days .. like day 1 .... When we did the comparison thread :

Mahle SL 1.1 to SL 1.2 - What's Possible and What's Different ?

The SL 1.2 is out in the wild with the '23 Levo SL. From what we know so far, mountings and connections are all the same. It works with the existing battery and range extender (shorter 145mm instead of 160mm cable). The motor is slightly larger due to the two piece aluminium honeycomb casing...

www.emtbforums.com

A few early adopters like @CjP and others also noticed that the 1.2 didn't actually seem to be any more powerful in Turbo with all the settings set to max (they're not/weren't by default). IE, run the bikes back to back, swap riders, do the same and repeat - zero difference and power readings which were the same or actually slightly higher on the 1.1 motor depending on the motor/battery.

I did start a thread for people to enter their power screen captures and also asked for motor and Mastermind firmware numbers, as we weren't sure if it was all bikes or just certain bikes and it could have been down to some bikes possibly not having the 1.2 firmware or certain mastermind firmwares not supporting the full power settings for the 1.2 . I think there was one reply so had the thread deleted.

The original motor was quoted as being 80% efficient. The 240w is what the motor "produces". So if you multiply the Amps and Volts shown in Mission Control whilst you ride, you should have about 300w draw from the battery at peak voltage (Fully charged).

For the 1.2 they claim 320w from the motor, so at 80% efficiency, you should see 400w draw from the battery (Fully Charged).

Can't find an upto date example, but this was on a Kenevo FF

For this example, 37.8 Volts * 19.4 Amps, means it's drawing 733 Watts.

 

[p3eps]

In the early days .. like day 1 .... When we did the comparison thread :

Mahle SL 1.1 to SL 1.2 - What's Possible and What's Different ?

The SL 1.2 is out in the wild with the '23 Levo SL. From what we know so far, mountings and connections are all the same. It works with the existing battery and range extender (shorter 145mm instead of 160mm cable). The motor is slightly larger due to the two piece aluminium honeycomb casing...

www.emtbforums.com

A few early adopters like @CjP and others also noticed that the 1.2 didn't actually seem to be any more powerful in Turbo with all the settings set to max (they're not/weren't by default). IE, run the bikes back to back, swap riders, do the same and repeat - zero difference and power readings which were the same or actually slightly higher on the 1.1 motor depending on the motor/battery.

I did start a thread for people to enter their power screen captures and also asked for motor and Mastermind firmware numbers, as we weren't sure if it was all bikes or just certain bikes and it could have been down to some bikes possibly not having the 1.2 firmware or certain mastermind firmwares not supporting the full power settings for the 1.2 . I think there was one reply so had the thread deleted.

The original motor was quoted as being 80% efficient. The 240w is what the motor "produces". So if you multiply the Amps and Volts shown in Mission Control whilst you ride, you should have about 300w draw from the battery at peak voltage (Fully charged).

For the 1.2 they claim 320w from the motor, so at 80% efficiency, you should see 400w draw from the battery (Fully Charged).

Can't find an upto date example, but this was on a Kenevo FF

View attachment 121961

For this example, 37.8 Volts * 19.4 Amps, means it's drawing 733 Watts.

You mention full charge... does the bike need to be fully charged? I think I've got about 60% left over from yesterday's ride.

Mine has only had the Firmware Update the shop did to remove the turtle .
That was about 2 weeks after the release, so it may be newer than a day 1 bike?

 

[CjP]

You mention full charge... does the bike need to be fully charged? I think I've got about 60% left over from yesterday's ride.

Mine has only had the Firmware Update the shop did to remove the turtle .
That was about 2 weeks after the release, so it may be newer than a day 1 bike?

My KSL had 90% charge in my above example but maybe for consistency of results charge to 100% and I will redo my results fully charged

 

[Zimmerframe]

You mention full charge... does the bike need to be fully charged? I think I've got about 60% left over from yesterday's ride.

Mine has only had the Firmware Update the shop did to remove the turtle .
That was about 2 weeks after the release, so it may be newer than a day 1 bike?

My KSL had 90% charge in my above example but maybe for consistency of results charge to 100% and I will redo my results fully charged

I think the 1.1 and 1.2 both run voltage compensation (so will allow higher amps at lower voltages to achieve consistent Watts as the battery/voltage reduces).

But as @CjP says, for consistency and to rule out as many things as possible, it would be best to obtain results with as many variables the same as possible - like fully charged (or as near to as possible).

 

[nicknameless]

After two years with a Kenevo SL and two months with the new Levo SL PRO, after reading you I can only smile!!!!!

I usually ride Levo Gen 3, Enduro 2020 and Epic EVO…… if you can't tell the difference between the two generations of SL motor, you probably need a Brose or Bosch

And I can only smile at your seeming misinterpretation of what I have said. I believe there is a difference in the motors (I have not said anything otherwise) but I do not believe that difference was significant enough to warrant my purchase of a bike with the 1.2 motor over a 1.1.

Of course we're all probably suffering from a little bit of confirmation bias related to our purchases BUT I test rode the 1.2 levo SL to make a decision on purchasing that bike. The geo was great but the motor didn't sell it to me over the KSL.

 

[Doomanic]

The geo was great but the motor didn't sell it to me over the KSL.

Agreed, and the KSL is still the better bike for the riding I do.

 

[p3eps]

I think the 1.1 and 1.2 both run voltage compensation (so will allow higher amps at lower voltages to achieve consistent Watts as the battery/voltage reduces).

But as @CjP says, for consistency and to rule out as many things as possible, it would be best to obtain results with as many variables the same as possible - like fully charged (or as near to as possible).

I'd have thought they have to compensate the voltage, otherwise the bike would become less powerful the further into the ride you get.

I'll pop it on the charger when I get home for the purpose of keeping it consistent though.

 

[cañonaco]

This afternoon, after a while of tests, I have managed to get the motors to give the maximum around 60-70 rpm. To remove it I have placed a medium sprocket and a 100/100 configuration. The slope is not too long but it has been repeated many times.

KSL has not sustained more than 5.80A with 6.00A spikes.

LS2 has sustained 7.80 A with peaks up to 8.40 A.

I think that all of this coincides with the values of the brand, with the dyno test and with the sensations in motion.

 

[p3eps]

I did a run a minute ago… and am still breathing heavily from it!!

Started at the bottom of the hill with 100%.

I crawled along in 2nd gear up the hill. I must’ve had cadence of about 80 at this point. The motor was whining and giving me good support.

I then upped the pace and went through the gears - getting up to about 8th and hammering up the hill reaching 14mph (and my legs were burning!!)

The battery dropped 2% over this half mile climb, and my heart rate jumped from about 70 to 161

At the peak, I had a steady 7.20 to 7.80A on my recording over the course of a minute or so. Output of 395W apparently, so better than claimed.

 

[Dax]

Output of 395W apparently, so better than claimed.

Output will be slightly less, 395 is what it’s pulling from the battery, the motor will not be 100% efficient.

 

[cañonaco]

 

[p3eps]

Output will be slightly less, 395 is what it’s pulling from the battery, the motor will not be 100% efficient.

cañonaco’s post above has it with 8.40A… which would be 440W.

The motor is listed to output 320W, so even with the claimed 80% efficiency, it’s still producing more than it should (352W). Even at 7.80A it’s just on the 320W.

 

[CjP]

Thank you guys for the above data collection. There is no doubt those bike are producing more power in my mind.
Now to work out why there are bikes running different power.
I am going to try obtain another bike from a different supplier for testing.

 

[CjP]

Just rode my brothers FF Gen 2 Kenevo in mthe same test as my KSL with his trail set at 60/60 and it put out 39.4 volts and 11 amps which equals 435.50 watts. This is what I was hoping for. FF trail equal to SL Turbo to make rolling with FF’s a little more bearable.
.

 

[p3eps]

So... are we now all onboard that the SL1.2 motor IS ACTUALLY more powerful than the SL1.1 motor?!
That's 2 different people verified the output with very similar results.

I genuinely couldn't notice much difference in Turbo 100/100 when I switched from the 1.1 to the 1.2... however now it does feel more powerful, and can get me up technical climbs my 1.1 couldn't. I can't see them needing broken in... so I wonder what it is? I haven't had a software update either.

 

[CjP]

Well the data above shows a definitive larger power draw from the battery. Why the ones I tested (and many others) showed much less draw I have no idea. I have my LBS trying to find out more info.

Fingers crossed they sort it out as I would love to feel this extra power. If it feels like a FF Kenevo in trail then that’s spot on!

 

[p3eps]

Well the data above shows a definitive larger power draw from the battery. Why the ones I tested (and many others) showed much less draw I have no idea. I have my LBS trying to find out more info.

Fingers crossed they sort it out as I would love to feel this extra power. If it feels like a FF Kenevo in trail then that’s spot on!

I'd be interested to know what's different. Mine seems to have got more powerful with age / use - but I can't see that being possible!!

 

[CjP]

I guess there could be some sort of programmed power reduction until certain km/mi are reached? Might explain my situation with the test bike.

 

[p3eps]

I guess there could be some sort of programmed power reduction until certain km/mi are reached? Might explain my situation with the test bike.

That would make sense, certainly in my testing. Perhaps to ensure it was run in a bit more gently.
It also might explain the bike being set to 100/80 on Turbo out of the box. The first thing I did was change it to 100/100 and whack it in Turbo!

There was no denying that Eco and Trail on their default settings were significantly more torquey and punchy than their 1.1 motor counterparts... but the Turbo didn't seem to be any different.

I wonder if the demo bikes that the magazines / reviewers were given had already done some miles prior to them testing them

 

[Dax]

I guess there could be some sort of programmed power reduction until certain km/mi are reached?

They do that so new riders aren’t overwhelmed by the power

 

[CjP]

That would make sense, certainly in my testing. Perhaps to ensure it was run in a bit more gently.
It also might explain the bike being set to 100/80 on Turbo out of the box. The first thing I did was change it to 100/100 and whack it in Turbo!

There was no denying that Eco and Trail on their default settings were significantly more torquey and punchy than their 1.1 motor counterparts... but the Turbo didn't seem to be any different.

I wonder if the demo bikes that the magazines / reviewers were given had already done some miles prior to them testing them

It’s possible, I will actually go re hire the original bike I tested.

 

[Zimmerframe]

KSL has not sustained more than 5.80A with 6.00A spikes.

LS2 has sustained 7.80 A with peaks up to 8.40 A.

Sweet ! Thanks.

At the peak, I had a steady 7.20 to 7.80A on my recording over the course of a minute or so. Output of 395W apparently, so better than claimed.

Yes, that's about what it should be with 80% efficiency to give you 320w from the motor.

OK, so as others have said, that looks like we finally have some numbers which show the 1.2 DOES produce what it's supposed to.

What we've not worked out yet is why for many of us, the 1.2 only gave 6 amps max draw - like the 1.1. Hence why for a lot of people, it doesn't feel any more powerful - because it's not !

Presumably some bikes were shipped with the 1.1 firmware or there's some other issue. (Remember, a lot of these bikes were built and then put on hold and sat around for a year whilst the motor was changed and so on). The low power 1.2's wasn't a one off and has happened on multiple instances to lots of different people all over the world, so it's not even just a geographical batch that got fecked up.

Not sure if anyone still has a 240w 1.2 around they can check the firmware number on and compare it to the 320w 1.2's.

Then someone needs to find a friendly Spesh dealer to see if they can get their app to put the 1.2 firmware on a 1.1 motor.. but it's probably locked out by serial/model number.

 

[p3eps]

Sweet ! Thanks.


Yes, that's about what it should be with 80% efficiency to give you 320w from the motor.

OK, so as others have said, that looks like we finally have some numbers which show the 1.2 DOES produce what it's supposed to.

What we've not worked out yet is why for many of us, the 1.2 only gave 6 amps max draw - like the 1.1. Hence why for a lot of people, it doesn't feel any more powerful - because it's not !

Presumably some bikes were shipped with the 1.1 firmware or there's some other issue. (Remember, a lot of these bikes were built and then put on hold and sat around for a year whilst the motor was changed and so on). The low power 1.2's wasn't a one off and has happened on multiple instances to lots of different people all over the world, so it's not even just a geographical batch that got fecked up.

Not sure if anyone still has a 240w 1.2 around they can check the firmware number on and compare it to the 320w 1.2's.

Then someone needs to find a friendly Spesh dealer to see if they can get their app to put the 1.2 firmware on a 1.1 motor.. but it's probably locked out by serial/model number.

My 1.2 bike has had the same firmware on it since the first day I rode it.
On day 1, I felt like 100/100 was no more powerful than the 1.1 motor I’d just swapped from.
After a few rides, the 1.2 motor seemed to ‘come to life’, and 100/100 has a distinct feeling of more power.

It hasn’t been back to the shop, so unless it’s magically done an OTA firmware update without me knowing? I never use Mission Control unless it’s to tweak the assist settings - so I’m only ever in in for 1 min at a time… and have never been asked to do an update.

On another note… I thought it was pretty cool that when I switched my bike on yesterday, the Mastermind popped up ‘RD Battery Low’, as I hadn’t charged my AXS Transmission since the day I got it! Took me a second to realise what it was saying… but a handy feature!

 

[tabbibus]

My 1.2 bike has had the same firmware on it since the first day I rode it.
On day 1, I felt like 100/100 was no more powerful than the 1.1 motor I’d just swapped from.
After a few rides, the 1.2 motor seemed to ‘come to life’, and 100/100 has a distinct feeling of more power.

It hasn’t been back to the shop, so unless it’s magically done an OTA firmware update without me knowing? I never use Mission Control unless it’s to tweak the assist settings - so I’m only ever in in for 1 min at a time… and have never been asked to do an update.

On another note… I thought it was pretty cool that when I switched my bike on yesterday, the Mastermind popped up ‘RD Battery Low’, as I hadn’t charged my AXS Transmission since the day I got it! Took me a second to realise what it was saying… but a handy feature!

Man I wish these bikes came with axs stock

 

[CjP]

My 1.2 bike has had the same firmware on it since the first day I rode it.
On day 1, I felt like 100/100 was no more powerful than the 1.1 motor I’d just swapped from.
After a few rides, the 1.2 motor seemed to ‘come to life’, and 100/100 has a distinct feeling of more power.

It hasn’t been back to the shop, so unless it’s magically done an OTA firmware update without me knowing? I never use Mission Control unless it’s to tweak the assist settings - so I’m only ever in in for 1 min at a time… and have never been asked to do an update.

On another note… I thought it was pretty cool that when I switched my bike on yesterday, the Mastermind popped up ‘RD Battery Low’, as I hadn’t charged my AXS Transmission since the day I got it! Took me a second to realise what it was saying… but a handy feature!

I don’t see why they couldn’t program a run in tune based on usage. It would make total sense as I know the do it on the newer motos.

 

[johned]

I recently updated my brakes to Shigura.
I've got centrelock wheels and struggled to get appropriate size discs that were thick enough for the Magura calipers.
TRP seem out of stock everywhere but got Galfers, alongside the Galfer speed sensor magnet.
The Galfer speed sensor magnet didn't work with the KSL so tried the Specialized CL magnet but this fouled on the disc.
In the end I Krazy Glued a magnet on the Galfer disc and it works a treat. At ebay prices, I bought a couple of spare magnets in the unlikely event that this one falls off.
Galfer Wave CL - Bikeinn | Online store for bicycles and cycling equipment
Magnets - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204082347896
Hope this saves someone some time, if you're thinking about going down the same route.

 

[Hitorogoshi]

why is all this BLAH BLAH in the Kenevo Megathread? Move your pityful rich people comparisons to the correct forum post.

 

[CjP]

why is all this BLAH BLAH in the Kenevo Megathread? Move your pityful rich people comparisons to the correct forum post.

You’re really not funny mate.
Why do you feel the need to throw insults at people trying to sort out a problem on a community forum?
It makes you seem so sad and miserable.