Velowave Ranger 2 vs Velowave Ranger 2 Fat
On the numbers that decide this pair, the Velowave Ranger 2 is 10.4 kg lighter than the Velowave Ranger 2 Fat. Everything else is below, including where it loses.
Range is our estimate under the reference ride, not the manufacturer's claim. Cost is over 5 years at 3,000 km a year, on the same formula the cost-of-ownership calculator runs. How we work this out
| Spec | Velowave Ranger 2 | Velowave Ranger 2 Fat |
|---|---|---|
| Estimated range | 42 km | 41 km |
| Battery | 720 Wh | 720 Wh |
| Weight | 25.4 kg | 35.8 kg |
| Motor torque | 86 Nm | 86 Nm |
| Top speed | 45 km/h | 45 km/h |
| Price | $1,699 | $1,699 |
| 5-year cost | $2,324 | $2,324 |
Where each one wins
- Velowave Ranger 2 is 10.4 kg lighter.
The Velowave Ranger 2 Fat does not lead on a single measured axis here. That does not make it the wrong bike, but it does mean the Velowave Ranger 2 is the one to justify not buying.
What each one costs to own
Over 5 years the two land within 5% of each other, which is inside the error on any of these inputs. Cost is not the deciding factor here.
That figure moves mostly on the battery. The Velowave Ranger 2 covers about 38,400 km before its pack is due for replacement; the Velowave Ranger 2 Fat, about 38,400 km. Ride less than that and the replacement never enters the sum.
Run these numbers on your own mileage
Which one to buy
- Pick the Velowave Ranger 2 if you carry the bike up steps, onto a train, or into a flat.
Verdict
On the measured axes the Velowave Ranger 2 is the better buy, and the Velowave Ranger 2 Fat needs a reason of its own: a colour, a frame, a shop you trust, a price that moves. None of those are in our numbers, and all of them are legitimate.
Range here is an estimate under one reference ride, not a measurement. Yours will differ with terrain, weight, tyres and weather, which is what the range calculator is for.
Tell me when either of these gets cheaper
One email when a price moves on a bike you are watching. Nothing else.