New (e)bike day – Trek fuel exe 9.5

You’ve upgraded a lot, any reason you just didn’t buy a better version in the first place?

It was far cheaper to do it this way, and I get a spec I want. the only additional parts I had to buy was the brakes, the rest I just had lying around from spares. So its cost ~£6000 to get this spec, and thats without taking into account selling the fork, brakes, derailleur that it came with that I wont use.

The next model up is the 9.7, which costs £7800 (£2050 more than I paid for the 9.5) , and still ‘only’ has a fox 36 rhythm fork, deore 6100 brakes ,XT derailleur, and alloy bars. ok the 9.7 has better wheels, but wheels are a bit of a consumable for me, so I’m fine with having slightly heavy/cheap wheels

This is the conclusion I’ve also come to. I was going to buy a 9.7 but since Trek put their prices up I can buy a 9.5 & spend the difference on a better than 9.7 spec fork & a couple of decent tyres along with fitting my OneUp bars & Code brakes to get it how I want it.

I have xt 4 pots on the wild FS, but these mt420 have the really long 2 finger lever and no servowave,so they feel really weak to me. I suspect that just changing the lever to slx or xt levers would bring them up to xt levels of power.

I just put some non series deore 5120 calipers and 5000 levers onto the HT (as they cost me <£100 for both) and stopping power seems identical to the XT/SLX 4 pots I have on the EEB/FS within differences you’d get with different pads.

EEB is 223/203 and the FS/HT are 203/180

Trek offer a GX Axs model and an XT model, 1000 euro difference, only realspec change is a 400 euro GX Axs upgrade kit instead of the XT. Much better value lower in the range

And what are they doing speccing two-finger brake levers on a bike of this sort (and price) anyway?

Deore 6120 would probably have cost a tenner or less extra, at OE prices.

Much better value lower in the range

yep – prices for the higher end build are nuts (they’re pretty nuts at the bottom end too, but not as bad) – its like the sum of the parts at full retail prices + 40% margin on top

And what are they doing speccing two-finger brake levers on a bike of this sort (and price) anyway? Deore 6120 would probably have cost a tenner or less extra, at OE prices.

I don’t think there is any causal relationship between what it costs them and what it’s sold for.
Same discussion as why Shimano charge less for longer levers or more to replace a security screw with a Philips one.

It’s about Trek putting something shit on the bike to make people go to the next model up where they can extend the difference between what it costs vs what they can sell it for.

As it happens my Powerfly FS came with MT200 brakes… and Acera gears. The point of the Acera gears is I feel that you couldn’t just swap for another 9sp with a clutch at the time so you either bought a EMTB with no clutch or went to the next model.

There’s certainly an element of that, but my feeling is that a bike of this price and intention should at least have kit which is fit for purpose.

Maybe starting with the good Deore stuff and progressing through SLX, XT & XTR levels, or the Sram equivalents.

Putting shit brakes on just makes them look greedy at the expense of the user experience.

I’ve had my Trek Fuel EXE 9.7 for a few weeks now. You’re welcome to ask questions and I’ll try and answer.

Have you done a proper range test – what did you get (distance & elevation)?

The Kenevo SL impressed me greatly, 7,500ft with the extender

That’s mighty impressive! The best I managed at the Golfie was 4800ish, but I am a lazy fat knacker…

This weekend I did a 30km ride on the Surrey/Hampshire borders (around Ceasars Camp) with 300m of elevation in mid and high mode and was out for about 4 hours in technical muddy single track and used 60% of the battery.

Battery life for my needs is more than adequate.

I think the 9.7 is the sweet spot price/kit wise as it comes with SLX/XT with Fox.

Have you done a proper range test – what did you get (distance & elevation)?

Range is obviously massively variable , depending on loads of things, but from stuff posted in another forum , people seems to be getting between ~650m and ~1100m of elevation gain, depending on what modes you use , how you have the modes configured, how heavy you are etc etc.

My first (and only so far ) ride I got 16 miles and 721m of elevation, using the two highest modes, also I had customised those modes to offer a fair bit more power than they would as stock. I have since lowered them back down, still higher than stock though, and hope to get better range as a result.

If I could get 900m that would be good.

My first (and only so far ) ride I got 16 miles and 721m of elevation, using the two highest modes, also I had customised those modes to offer a fair bit more power than they would as stock. I have since lowered them back down, still higher than stock though, and hope to get better range as a result.

If I could get 900m that would be good.

Sorry to ask, but what do you weigh (as this seems to have a big impact on range)?

Sorry to ask, but what do you weigh (as this seems to have a big impact on range)?

no probs* – 84kg

* I draw the line at telling you my age

Speed of climbing makes more difference in my experience. I did a weekend with non-eebs and on a single charge without RE did 51km and 1786m ascent over 2 days. Conversely, on our last day in Scotland me and a mate both rinsed our REs turboing from the hotel to the top of NY NY…

people seems to be getting between ~650m and ~1100m of elevation gain,

So would you expect a lot more from a full fat ebike?

And is that relying a lot on the motor assist?

The numbers seem really low to a noob like me

So would you expect a lot more from a full fat ebike?

And is that relying a lot on the motor assist?

my full fat ebike typically gives me about 1400m elevation gain,over about 30 miles, mostly in a mid assistance mode, thats with a 625wh battery.

The numbers seem really low to a noob like me

Its so variable from person to person, depending on how you ride any given ebike, Its kind of like comparing fuel economy on cars, one person might get 40mpg, another in the same car might get 30mpg, just because of different driving styles, locations etc.

Your average speed is a big influence on the range you get (as doomanic mentions) – go faster = use more battery, same as electric cars in that respect.

julians – thanks, ball-park with me

The numbers seem really low to a noob like me

TBH that’s why I’ve been demoing & hiring them to try and work out will they do what I want.

An hours’ demo will tell you nothing, but a full day (or more) will let you ‘stress’ test them – as can be seen from my Golfie day (above).

When I’m looking at spending eBike money, £85 for a days demo is well spent if it saves me an (expensive) mistake.

These guys have tried to create a standardised range test here : https://flowmountainbike.com/tests/trek-fuel-exe-review-2023/

They put each bike in its most powerful mode, and then pedalled up a road climb, and back down, repeated until the battery runs out. Not 100% scientific, but gives an idea of what should be possible.

Norco Sight VLT (Shimano EP8, 900Wh Battery) – 2,478m climbing (12.8 runs)
Rocky Mountain Altitude Powerplay (Dyname 4.0, 720Wh Battery) – 2,108m climbing (10.9 runs)
Cube Stereo Hybrid 160 (Bosch Gen 4, 625Wh Battery) – 1,800m climbing (9.3 runs)
Canyon Spectral:ON (Shimano EP8, 630Wh Battery) – 1,570m climbing (8 runs)
Orbea Rise (Shimano EP8-RS, 360Wh Battery) – 1,388m climbing (7.2 runs)
Specialized Levo SL (SL 1.1, 320Wh Battery) – 1,377m climbing (7.1 runs)
Trek Fuel EXe (TQ-HPR50, 360Wh Battery) – 1,312m climbing (6.8 runs)
Specialized Kenevo SL (SL 1.1, 320Wh Battery) – 1,053m climbing (5.5 runs)

I’m surprised there’s so much difference between the Levo SL and Kenevo SL.

This is enlightening.

So these things aren’t really for doing a 3,000m or 4,000m ascent day, instead of the usual 1,500m on a normal bike?

In terms of what they offer the rider, they’re more for squeezing a 1,000m ride into half the time it’d usually take?

I’m surprised there’s so much difference between the Levo SL and Kenevo SL.

Could be as simple as tyre choice.

I’ve had a quick look but couldn’t see whether they run ‘control’ tyres – would’ve been sensible if not.

This is enlightening.

So these things aren’t really for doing a 3,000m or 4,000m ascent day, instead of the usual 1,500m on a normal bike?

In terms of what they offer the rider, they’re more for squeezing a 1,000m ride into half the time it’d usually take?

Yes. No. Both. Either.

If you’re already doing 1500m days then you’ll do considerably more on an eeb or do it considerably faster, but not both.

So these things aren’t really for doing a 3,000m or 4,000m ascent day, instead of the usual 1,500m on a normal bike?

You can choose to go faster , or further, or a mix of both, just set your level of assist accordingly.

In terms of what they offer the rider, they’re more for squeezing a 1,000m ride into half the time it’d usually take?

Thats one use , going twice as fast (avg speed) as a normal bike – but if you choose to ride at normal bike speeds you could go twice as far at the same average speed as your normal bike. You choose what you want the limit to be – your fitness, the bikes battery, the time available to ride, by adjusting the level of assist and the power you generate accordingly.

That table above of elevation gains is on max assist apparently – not scientific, but puts things into a relative order.

Fuel EXe – Trek Fuel EXe – Trying to understand range and altitude possibilities | EMTB Forums

quick update for those that are interested.

I went for another ride last night, this time I have turned the settings back down towards (but still more powerful than) their default settings.

default settings
eco : max power 99w, assist 86%
mid : max power 180w, assist 112%
max : max power 300w, assist 156%

Last nights settings
eco : max power 150w, assist 105%
mid : max power 180w, assist 135%
max : max power 300w, assist 156%

Did 13 miles, and 1900 feet climbing, average speed 9.5mph, and finished with 28% battery remaining. I feel that my eco setting is probably too high, and the mid setting is a touch too low, so will fiddle with those for the next ride (I’ll probably just end up arriving at the defaults, probably should have just started there, but wheres the fun in that), but I think that 3000 feet climbing range on my normal sort of ride is a distinct possibility.

Bike is going great, its nice to be on a more nimble bike, and the near total silence from the motor is refreshing.

The rear suspension continues to be surprising, it feels like so much more than just 140mm travel.

The magura mt7 brakes I fitted are great, possibly the best brakes I have used , they seem to have the power of sram code rsc, and the modulation of hope tech 3 e4.

Have you got the range extender? Not sure how much it adds but surely you’d be looking at an easy 1500m/5000ft of climbing which is a big day by anyone’s book.

Have you got the range extender?

not yet, so my figures above are all just on the standard battery.

I’m pretty sure I will end up getting it though , just to do some bigger rides in the summer.

Plus the fact that the range extender is sufficiently small to be allowed on aeroplanes (max 160wh , range extender is 160wh) , so I could feasibly take this bike on our annual foreign trips instead of my YT capra, by taking just the range extender battery only and leaving the larger internal battery at home.

I am looking at one of these, any update from owners?

Also would 160mm forks invalidate the warranty?

The bike has been good, can’t remember whether I posted this up above, but the motor failed after 400 miles, and when I cleaned the bike to take it back to the shop I found a crack in the frame.

Both these were sorted under warranty (new motor, new frame).

I know that doesn’t sound like a good bike but I believe these were one offs, probably due to buying so early in the production life of the bike and motor, and the replacements have been fine and had some proper tough use. I like how it rides etc.

Can confirm that 160mm forks don’t void the warranty, it states in the manual that 160mm forks are fine.

I’ve had one for a few months and got the 9.8 xt in a sale. So far it’s been good and I’m glad I purchased a ‘lightweight’ ebike. Most of my friends are surprised how light it is and also how quiet it is with the TQ motor.

I’ve not been on that many long rides but have managed in excess of 15 miles and 3000ft running mostly on full power with a few bits of medium power.

I bought a 9.8 xt too and tbh its been the best thing I could have done, totally got my mojo back for riding and its perfect for what I want it for, ride with my regular friends on analogue bikes or full power fast blasts on my own with a spare 90 mins

Cheers folks for the replies

They put each bike in its most powerful mode, and then pedalled up a road climb, and back down, repeated until the battery runs out. Not 100% scientific, but gives an idea of what should be possible.

Norco Sight VLT (Shimano EP8, 900Wh Battery) – 2,478m climbing (12.8 runs)
Rocky Mountain Altitude Powerplay (Dyname 4.0, 720Wh Battery) – 2,108m climbing (10.9 runs)
Cube Stereo Hybrid 160 (Bosch Gen 4, 625Wh Battery) – 1,800m climbing (9.3 runs)
Canyon Spectral:ON (Shimano EP8, 630Wh Battery) – 1,570m climbing (8 runs)
Orbea Rise (Shimano EP8-RS, 360Wh Battery) – 1,388m climbing (7.2 runs)
Specialized Levo SL (SL 1.1, 320Wh Battery) – 1,377m climbing (7.1 runs)
Trek Fuel EXe (TQ-HPR50, 360Wh Battery) – 1,312m climbing (6.8 runs)
Specialized Kenevo SL (SL 1.1, 320Wh Battery) – 1,053m climbing (5.5 runs)

in terms of m climbed per Wh, the light weight bikes are significantly better. With the Levo being the best.

“riding up a hill in the most powerful mode” is going to mean different things on different bikes. unless its an exceptionally steep hill, they will be at or near the speed limiter, so using more or less of their own power to do so.

I guess the way to maximise climbing range is to adjust your motor power based on gradient so you are always inputting your FTP/sustainable maximum? the mental alure of bumping up the motor power and easing off your legs must be strong though…