Lectric XP 3.0 vs. Ride1Up Portola – battle of the leading budget e-bikes
There are plenty of low-cost electric bikes out there, but the lowest-priced options can sometimes be more trouble than they’re worth. Two main sub-$1,000 folding electric bikes have risen to the top of the bang-for-your-buck list, the Lectric XP 3.0 and the Ride1Up Portola.
So which one is right for you?
Lectric XP 3.0 Vs Ride1Up Portola – How did we get here?
The Lectric XP 3.0, as the name suggests, is the third iteration of what has become the best-selling electric bike in North America. The $999 e-bike may not be a masterclass in sexy design, but it sure does manage to jam-pack performance into a low-cost ride. And with a large headquarters in Phoenix, AZ, Lectric Ebikes has proven that a strong support team is just as important as a low price tag.
Ride1Up, another leader in value-oriented electric bikes, got its start shortly before Lectric Ebikes with a wide range of commuter-focused models. The company has recently expanded into new bike styles but is a relative newcomer to the folding e-bike space after launching the Ride1Up Portola earlier this week. The Portola is widely seen as an attempt by Ride1Up to target that lucrative folding fat-tire e-bike slice of of the mobility pie that Lectric has dominating for years.
The two bikes are actually quite similar, so let’s dive in and see how we can differentiate them.
Lectric Ebikes vs. Ride1Up: Price
The Lectric XP 3.0 has long been priced at $999, helping keep it on just about every “best e-bike under $1,000” list out there.
The Ride1Up Portola recently debuted with an MSRP of $995, which makes the difference in price largely meaningless unless you were really hoping to spend your last four dollars on some cool beads for your bicycles spokes.
As part of this week’s launch though, the Ride1Up Portola is actually on sale for $895 though, meaning you’ll save an extra $100 if you decide to buy one by… today. For anyone reading this in the future, we’re probably back to that four-dollar price difference.
Speed and power
Both the Lectric XP 3.0 and the Ride1Up Portola ship as Class 2 electric bikes, meaning they’ll hit 20 mph (32 km/h) out of the box on throttle-only acceleration. They can also both be unlocked via the bike’s display to Class 3 speed, meaning you can use pedal assist to reach a maximum of 28 mph (45 km/h).
The power levels are slightly different though. Lectric claims a 500W continuous power motor with 1,000W of peak power and 55 Nm of torque. The Portola gets a more powerful 750W continuous power motor and 65 Nm of torque (the peak power spec isn’t published).
That means that all else being equal, the Portola is likely to accelerate a bit more quickly and climb hills faster, even if the flat ground top speeds of the two bikes are largely similar. Those that live in hillier areas are more likely to feel that difference, while those that live in flatter areas won’t feel the contrast as significantly.
Battery capacity and range
Advertised range is a highly suspect figure in the e-bike world because it can be affected by everything from tire to pressure to terrain to how much you ate for lunch. The exact same e-bike can get 20 miles or 50 miles of range when switching from power-sipping pedal assist to feet-dragging throttle. That means the best way to compare two similarly sized and relatively similarly powerful bikes is by the battery capacity.
The base battery on the Lectric XP 3.0 and Ride1Up Portola are actually the same capacity. Both are rated at 48V 10.4Ah for 500 Wh of capacity.
Both bikes also come with a larger battery option though, with the Lectric’s measuring in at 48V 14Ah for 672 Wh of capacity and the Ride1Up Portola’s packing slightly less at 48V 13.4Ah for 643 Wh of capacity. Those are quite close, but Lectric takes the cake there.
Consider though that the long-range battery option is only a $100 upgrade from Ride1Up but costs an extra $200 at Lectric, so the slightly smaller battery is technically also slightly more cost effective.
Bike components
When it comes to the drivetrain and other bike components, there are several similarities but also a number of key differences.
Both bikes feature hydraulic disc brakes on 180 mm disc rotors. They both feature 20″ x 3″ tires as a nice compromise between comfort and agility. They both feature front and rear LED lights. They both feature simplistic black-and-white LCD displays.
From here, thing start to differ. While both bikes have frame-integrated rear racks, Lectric’s comes with a higher weight rating of 150 pounds vs. the lower weight rating of 130 pounds for the Portola. On the other hand, both bikes have front suspension, but the Portola has 80 mm of travel while the Lectric XP 3.0 has just 50 mm of travel.
The Portola has slightly nicer fenders with adjustable arms for getting the perfect tire spacing (though I tend to just grab the Lectric’s arms and pull on them to bend them and adjust my spacing that way). The Portola also has an 8-speed drivetrain compared to Lectric’s 7-speed, and it powers a slightly higher-quality Shimano Altus derailleur compared to Lectric’s cheaper Tourney derailleur.
Speaking of component quality, this is probably a good time to point out that Ride1Up’s Reention FR-5 battery is also considered to be higher quality than Lectric’s more affordable DCH-006 battery. Neither come with UL-certification at the moment, but both companies are expected to such certification at some point in the future.
Both bikes appear to use current-controlled pedal assist systems (PAS), which is a more refined way to implement a cadence sensor and get faux-torque sensor performance. However, the Ride1Up Portola seems to have a finer degree of adjustability built into the PAS sensor to achieve more precise starts with less lag, down to as little as 10% of a pedal turn. There are also individually programmable PAS levels so riders can fine-tune their PAS to their liking.
Ride1Up Portola vs. Lectric XP 3.0: Convenience
Convenience is very much subjective, but there are a few important differences between these two bikes that play a big role in convenience.
For starters, the Ride1Up Portola has a battery that is removable without folding the bike, while the XP 3.0 requires the bike to be folded while the battery is removed. When it comes time for folding and lifting, the 59 lb. Portola is slightly lighter than the 64 lb. XP 3.0.
For everyday use, the Portola thus is likely slightly more convenient, though the XP 3.0 wins on the first day due to its easier assembly right out of the box. In fact, there’s no assembly required since the Lectric XP 3.0 only needs to be taken out of the box and unfolded to be ready to ride. The Portola arrives “95% assembled,” which basically means just bolting on the handlebars. That’s relatively easy (and there’s an instructional video), but it might still be intimidating to someone who has never worked on a bike before, and it is important that it is done correctly so the bike is safe to steer and ride.
Design
Design and aesthetics can be subjective, so this section will be partly based on opinion.
Personally, I find the Ride1Up’s frame design to be sleeker and more attractive than the XP 3.0’s boxier-style frame. I also like the wider range of color choices from Ride1Up.
Lectric gives riders the choice of either a step-over or step-thru frame, while the Portola is available in only a step-thru frame. They both have a nice grab handle in the middle of the frame for lifting, so they both get points there.
The wires are run externally on the XP 3.0, which can be a positive for accessibility in the event of repairs or upgrade work, but also doesn’t look as nice as the internally routed hidden wires on the Portola.
The chrome suspension stanchions and silver fender arms on the XP 3.0 will appeal to anyone who prefers a flashier look, while the Portola’s blacked-out stanchions and fender arms offer a more muted look that blends into the bike.
Accessory lineup
The Lectric XP 3.0 is the clear winner when it comes to the breadth of the accessories offered.
Both bikes come with similar main accessories, such as passenger packages that add a rear bench seat with foot pegs, comfort packages with nicer saddles, cargo rack and basket options, phone mounts, and panniers for carrying groceries. But Lectric has many more additional options available, likely due to holding a several-year head start in the folding fat-tire e-bike space.
Lectric also has more niche offerings such as utility trailers, pet carriers, food delivery bags, and more.
What’s the verdict?
Ultimately, both of these are very nice options with incredible bang-for-your-buck value in the sub-$1,000 space.
I’d consider the Ride1Up Portola to be slightly more refined and with slightly better components, but I can’t count out the Lectric XP 3.0’s larger battery option and fully-assembled shipping, not to mention years’ worth of customer documentation for mods, upgrades, and other content already available in online communities. As a new model, it will take the Portola time to rack up that level of online documentation from a broad rider base.
Ultimately though, both models are strikingly similar in terms of actual specs and real-world performance. So the best decision is likely to go with the one that simply tickles your fancy more.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The Rio Tinto Group logo atop Central Park tower, which houses the company’s offices, in Perth, Australia, on Friday, Jan. 17, 2025.
Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images
The mining sector appears poised for a frantic year of dealmaking, following market speculation over a potential tie-up between industry giants Rio Tinto and Glencore.
It comes after Bloomberg News reported Thursday that British-Australian multinational Rio Tinto and Switzerland-based Glencore were in early-stage merger talks, although it was not clear whether the discussions were still live.
Separately, Reuters reported Friday that Glencore approached Rio Tinto late last year about the possibility of combining their businesses, citing a source familiar with the matter. The talks, which were said to be brief, were thought to be no longer active, the news agency reported.
Rio Tinto and Glencore both declined to comment when contacted by CNBC.
A prospective merger between Rio Tinto, the world’s second-largest miner, and Glencore, one of world’s largest coal companies, would rank as the mining industry’s largest-ever deal.
Combined, the two firms would have a market value of approximately $150 billion, leapfrogging longstanding industry leader BHP, which is worth about $127 billion.
Analysts were broadly skeptical about the merits of a Rio Tinto-Glencore merger, pointing to limited synergies, Rio Tinto’s complex dual structure and strategic divergences over coal and corporate culture as factors that pose a challenge for concluding a deal.
“I think everyone’s a bit surprised,” Maxime Kogge, equity analyst at Oddo BHF, told CNBC via telephone.
“Honestly, they have limited overlapping assets. It’s only copper where there is really some synergies and opportunity to add assets to make a bigger group,” Kogge said.
Global mining giants have been mulling the benefits of mega-mergers to shore up their position in the energy transition, particularly with demand for metals such as copper expected to skyrocket over the coming years.
A highly conductive metal, copper is projected to face shortages due to its use in powering electric vehicles, wind turbines, solar panels and energy storage systems, among other applications.
Oddo BHF’s Kogge said it is currently “really tricky” for large mining firms to bring new projects online, citing Rio Tinto’s long-delayed and controversial Resolution copper mine in the U.S. as one example.
“It’s a very promising copper project, it could be one of the largest in the world, but it is fraught with issues and somehow acquiring another company is a way to really accelerate the expansion into copper,” Kogge said.
“For me, a deal is not so attractive,” he added. “It goes against what all these groups have previously tried to do.”
Last year, BHP made a $49 billion bid for smaller rival Anglo American, a proposal which ultimately failed due to issues with the deal’s structure.
Some analysts, including those at JPMorgan, expect another unsolicited offer for Anglo American to materialize in 2025.
M&A parlor games
Analysts led by Dominic O’Kane at JPMorgan said the bank’s “high conviction view” that 2025 would be defined by mergers and acquisitions (M&A), particularly among U.K.-listed miners and global copper companies, was coming to fruition just two weeks into the year.
The Wall Street bank said its own analysis of the mining sector found that the current economic and risk management environment meant M&A was likely preferred to the building of organic projects.
Analysts at JPMorgan predicted the latest speculation would soon thrust Anglo American back into the spotlight, “specifically the merits and probability of another combination proposal from BHP.”
Prior to pursuing Anglo American, BHP completed an acquisition of OZ Minerals in 2023, bolstering its copper and nickel portfolio.
The company logo adorns the side of the BHP gobal headquarters in Melbourne on February 21, 2023. – The Australian multinational, a leading producer of metallurgical coal, iron ore, nickel, copper and potash, said net profit slumped 32 percent year-on-year to 6.46 billion US dollars in the six months to December 31. (Photo by William WEST / AFP) (Photo by WILLIAM WEST/AFP via Getty Images)
William West | Afp | Getty Images
Analysts led by Ben Davis at RBC Capital Markets said it remains unclear whether talks between Rio Tinto and Glencore could result in a simple merger or require the breakup of certain parts of each company instead.
Regardless, they said the M&A parlor games that arose following merger talks between BHP and Anglo American will undoubtedly “start up again in earnest.”
“Despite Glencore once approaching Rio Tinto’s key shareholder Chinalco in July 2014 for a potential merger, it still comes as a surprise,” analysts at RBC Capital Markets said in a research note published Thursday.
BHP’s move to acquire Anglo American may have catalyzed talks between Rio Tinto and Glencore, the analysts said, with the former potentially looking to gain more copper exposure and the latter seeking an exit strategy for its large shareholders.
“We would not expect a straight merger to happen as we believe Rio shareholders would see it as favouring Glencore, but [it’s] possible there is a deal structure out there that could keep both sets of shareholders and management happy,” they added.
Copper, coal and culture
Analysts led by Wen Li at CreditSights said speculation over a Rio Tinto-Glencore merger raises questions about strategic alignment and corporate culture.
“Strategically, Rio Tinto might be interested in Glencore’s copper assets, aligning with its focus on sustainable, future-facing metals. Additionally, Glencore’s marketing business could offer synergies and expand Rio Tinto’s reach,” analysts at CreditSights said in a research note published Friday.
“However, Rio Tinto’s lack of interest in coal assets, due to recent divestments, suggests any merger would need careful structuring to avoid unwanted asset overlaps,” they added.
A mining truck carries a full load of coal at Glencore Plc operated Tweefontein coal mine on October 16, 2024 in Tweefontein, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa.
Per-anders Pettersson | Getty Images News | Getty Images
From a cultural perspective, analysts at CreditSights said Rio Tinto was known for its conservative approach and focus on stability, whereas Glencore had garnered a reputation for “constantly pushing the envelope in its operations.”
“This cultural divide might pose challenges in integration and decision-making if a merger were to proceed,” analysts at CreditSights said.
“If this materializes, it could have broader implications for mega deals in the metals [and] mining space, potentially putting BHP/Anglo American back in play,” they added.
— CNBC’s Ganesh Rao contributed to this report.
GreenPower Motor Company says it’s received three orders for 11 of its BEAST electric Type D school buses for western state school districts in Arizona, California, and Oregon.
GreenPower hasn’t made the sort of headline-grabbing promises or big-money commitments that companies like Nikola and Lion Electric have, but while those companies are floundering GPM seems to be plugging away, taking orders where it can and actually delivering buses to schools. Late last year, the company scored 11 more orders for its flagship BEAST electric school bus.
As far as these latest orders go, the breakdown is:
- seven to Los Banos Unified School District in Los Banos, California
- two for the Hood River County School District in Hood River, Oregon
- two for the Casa Grande Elementary School District in Casa Grande, Arizona
Those two BEAST electric school buses for Arizona will join another 90-passenger BEAST that was delivered to Phoenix Elementary School District #1, which operates 15 schools in the center of Phoenix, late last year.
“As school districts continue to make the change from NOx emitting diesel school buses to a cleaner, healthier means of transporting students, school district transportation departments are pursuing the gold standard of the industry – the GreenPower all-electric, purpose-built (BEAST) school buses,” said Paul Start, GreenPower’s Vice President of Sales, School Bus Group. “(The) GreenPower school bus order pipeline and production schedule are both at record levels with sales projections for (2025) set to eclipse the 2024 calendar year.”
GreenPower moved into an 80,000-square-foot production facility in South Charleston, West Virigina in August 2022, and delivered its first buses to that state the following year.
Electrek’s Take
Since the first horseless carriage companies started operating 100 years ago (give or take), at least 1,900 different companies have been formed in the US, producing over 3,000 brands of American automobiles. By the mid 1980s, that had distilled down to “the big 3.”
All of which is to say: don’t let the recent round of bankruptcies fool you – startups in the car and truck industry is business as usual, but some of these companies will stick around. If you’re wondering which ones, look to the ones that are making units, not promises.
SOURCE | IMAGES: GreenPower Motors.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
While some recent high-profile bankruptcies have cast doubt on the EV startup space recently, medium-duty electric truck maker Harbinger got a shot of credibility this week with a massive $100 million Series B funding round co-led by Capricorn’s Technology Impact Fund.
It’s been a rough couple of weeks for fledgling EV brands like Lion Electric and Canoo, but box van builder Harbinger is bucking the trend, fueling its latest funding round with an order book of 4,690 vehicles that’s valued at nearly $500 million. Some of the company’s more notable customers including Bimbo Bakeries (which owns brands like Sara Lee, Thomas’, and Entenmann’s) and THOR Industries (Airstream, Jayco, Thor), which is also one of the investors in the Series B.
Other prominent investors include Tiger Global, the Coca-Cola System Sustainability Fund, and ArcTern Ventures.
As for what makes Harbinger such an attractive investment prospect, Dipender Saluja, Managing Partner of Capricorn Investment Group’s Technology Impact Fund explains that, “Harbinger has demonstrated a remarkable ability to reach significant milestones far quicker than other EV companies … the market has been impressed by their ability to develop large portions of the vehicle in-house to drive down unit costs, while remaining capital efficient.”
The company plans to use the funds to ramp up to higher-volume production capacity and deliver on existing orders, as well as build-out of the company’s sales, customer support, and service operations.
“Harbinger is entering a rapid growth phase where we are focused on scaling production of our customer-ready platform,” said John Harris, co-founder and CEO. “These funds catalyze significant revenue generation. We’ve developed a vehicle for a segment that is ripe for electrification, and there is a strong product/market fit that will help fuel our upward trajectory through 2025 and beyond.”
The company has raised $200 million since its inception in 2021.
SOURCE | IMAGES: Harbinger.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports10 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway