GT axle is not long enough to accommodate 107mm and needs to be modified. Confirmed this with Evolve.
3 Likes
There’s conflicting statements from their reps regarding this. Multiple people I know on FB have emailed reps and asked the ones on their and some have said they just haven’t tested it, some give that answer. I know someone who is getting them anyway so I will wait for him to confirm.
Edit: Nice picture, now hopefully some people in this thread will shut up 
what kind of battery leads are those? I’m hoping to be able to swap out the battery for a sub 160wh one for flights
Actually, I want to talk more
It’s seems no different internally from the raptor. Same logic, also a 10s lion battery. Still can’t find the number of p, by the size, it looks like 3p or 4p, which would make it the same config as the space cell. I don’t see how that battery pack gives 31 miles… I would like more info about their setup, but have yet to see anymore details about the battery (Ah, Wh, …), so I still don’t believe that number is even remotely accurate. Its about as thin as you can get a board with lion batteries, so bravo to them for that, but I don’t like bs numbers that suck people into to buy, only to find the range is very different later. If they would give more details (like enertion does), it would be easy to tell if that is the case here or not.
If you look at their spec sheet of wheels, they give the different top speeds for each size of wheel. But, when you go to buy, they say up to 26 mph. There’s no disclosure that the size of the wheel matters. It’s shady IMO to put information the way they do. They say there’s a few factors that MAY impact distance and top speed numbers. But as a consumer, if I didn’t know better, I would believe that i might at worst get 27 miles of range and 24 mph top speed. The top speed for the 83mm wheels are not even that high, so people are going to order and not realize they aren’t really getting what they want because of the way the information is presented in a misleading way IMO.
- my two cents
1 Like
I thought the 160wh rule was only for cargo flight and 99wh for normal flights but I would like to be wrong here was only something I heard
There’s already real world tests done by people that showed the GT getting >60km so I wouldn’t say it’s not remotely accurate. I’m guessing it’s a 10s6p lipo battery.
Don’t see much deception in saying “up to 26 mph” especially given they have you choose your wheel size before adding to cart, and offer the speed table in the first place.
1 Like
Every airline policy I’ve read seem to parrot the FAA’s (USA) policy, which is up to 2 spare 160wh packs outside of the device, and has their leads protected.
1 Like
thanks good to know
looking at the buying page, I don’t see the speed chart. So the info is not with the rest of the specs, and needs digging to find.
Also, video of range test, with real time power consumption data overlayed? If not, I don’t believe it. Like I’ve said before, with the space cell, I could get 25+ miles if I’m on flat and going down hills. Real world, I get 5 miles, mostly because I have long stretches of steep up hills. I don’t see anything indicating what range you could expect in different riding environments (like a data sheet).
Is that standard? I don’t think Boosted, Inboard, Acton, etc have data sheets on expected range for uphill/downhill. As a consumer, I’d just assume the testing was done on flat ground. FWIW, the >60km range was achieved in eco mode on flat ground.
i think it is normal that you test your board on flat ground you want to get nice numbers. i think it is okay as long as it is possible to reach the numbers for a normal consumer you do not test the consumtion of a ferrari with a teenager driving it because it would look horrible
1 Like
boosted board is based in san francisco so they test theirs on hilly terrain. I also know one of the ceos
I don’t think they’d base their spec sheet on riding around in SF. They most likely test in a more controlled environment.
1 Like
well of course they do controlled environment testing but they also test it on hills in their area if u dont believe me then just watch their videos, all for the most part are filmed in san fran
Watching you guys go at it is fun lol. I’m on the train home atm. Will respond when I get home in a bit
agreed. My point is they aren’t giving enough details to put the distance I can expect in perspective. Just because no one else is, does not mean the next guy shouldn’t either… That’s just bad logic IMO (its like saying I won’t go to the gym because no one else I know is). I think that giving a sheet or graphical representation, showing the different factors and the affect they have would have on range and top speed make the board more transparent. When you make claims of having something unique, back them up with irrefutable data. And that, they have not done IMO.
I agree, more information and transparency would be better. I’m just saying Evolve are no worse than any of the other brands that don’t currently give detailed testing methodologies either.
I can agree with you there. As someone who’s bought into stuff without knowing the real world results would be, it’s frustrating. The best thing any company has done IMO is what enertion did by creating this forum. Information should be freely shared. It’s possible for them to give more without other ripping their boards off.
Don’t know which distributors site you’re on but…
I will admit that the US site does not have the speed chart like the AUS site does. There’s a lot of hiccups between different distrib sites. But this disclaimer does exist on all of the distrib sites if they are carrying the GT and copy pasted the specs.
It’s not much worse than Boosted honestly. Boosted has been claiming the D+ goes 22mph when in fact it only hits that speed for a millisecond in pro and then maintains speed at 20mph. Boosted has also claimed their board gets 6 or 7 miles when in fact users rarely see that range unless they are on all flats or in eco.
The range will always depend on your environment and especially your riding style. Companies probably don’t bother doing extensive testing to come up with charts because it is practically impossible to capture all the factors enough to form a real-life range expectancy. There could be more disclosure of this fact, but then people wouldn’t even have a rough number to really go off of when they consider how much range they have. The truth is that it is a relative number and no one can precisely predict your range except you.
Again, as a consumer, if you were really concerned about this you would wait either find someone with the board and ask them to test or wait for it to be reviewed. The people who get excited at the specs and jump at it should already know the risk in getting something they have not seen tested. This is not Evolve’s first long range board, which is one of the reasons why I don’t believe they are BS’ing about this one, and I don’t think the tests out there are fake – despite your doubts.
On the US website and possibly others I believe this is the case because their speed chart is missing. But technically for everyone else it is their own fault for not looking closely at the specifications. I’m not surprised they would market the board like this the same way Boosted does marketing 22mph – except Boosted doesn’t really go 22mph (for long).
This would have to be a pretty robust data sheet that has to take in a shit ton of variables: wind, height, weight, temperature, hill grade, acceleration/breaking habits, speed change habits, etc. Too much to track. This could be done by a third party. But it would still just be a bunch of numbers thrown around since conditions in the real world change to such an extent that they can skew testing results imo.
2 Likes