Fast Answer for Busy Riders ⚡ (TL;DR)
If I had to put my own money down, I'd lean towards the EGRET PRO FX as the safer overall choice, mainly because it feels more consistent, more sorted, and a bit more trustworthy in day-to-day use. It's not a revelation, but it behaves like a scooter that knows its job and just gets on with it.
The IO HAWK Nine can tempt on looks and spec sheet bragging rights, but the execution feels rougher around the edges - good on paper, less convincing when you actually live with it. Choose the IO HAWK if you prioritise punchy performance and don't mind gambling a little on refinement and long-term polish. Choose the EGRET if you want something that may never wow you, but is far less likely to annoy you.
If you're still deciding where to drop your hard-earned cash, keep reading - the differences become very clear once you imagine them under your feet rather than on a product page.
There's a whole ecosystem of "almost premium" scooters fighting to be your daily companion, and the IO HAWK Nine and EGRET PRO FX sit right in that hotly contested zone. Both want to look serious, both whisper "commuter tool" with a dash of weekend fun, and both promise enough range and speed that you start checking your helmet strap twice.
The IO HAWK Nine is the scooter for riders who love the spec sheet first and ask about build quality later. It's aimed at thrill-leaning commuters who want a fast, muscular feel without going into ultra-beast territory.
The EGRET PRO FX is for riders who value a calmer, better-rounded package - not slow, not ultra-light, but a measured, grown-up take on the modern city scooter.
If you're wondering which one will make you happier after three months of potholes, wet mornings and late-night sprints home, that's where this comparison really starts to bite.
Who Are These For, and Why Compare Them?
Both the IO HAWK Nine and the EGRET PRO FX land in that mid-to-upper commuter bracket: not bargain-basement toys, but not the insane, dual-motor monsters either. Think of them as scooters for riders who've already owned something smaller, realised they actually use it a lot, and now want more speed, more comfort and more range - without going full lunatic.
They compete for the same rider: someone with a medium to longer commute, a mix of city streets and rougher cycle paths, who wants to cruise above bicycle speeds, carry the scooter only occasionally, and expects at least a hint of quality when they grab the bars. They also both position themselves as semi-premium European-market brands, promising better support and finish than generic imports - at least in theory.
In practice, the question becomes simple: do you bet on the slightly flashier, more aggressive IO HAWK Nine, or the more conservative, methodical EGRET PRO FX? On the street, they feel very different.
Design & Build Quality
Pick up the IO HAWK Nine and your first impression is, "Okay, this looks serious." It often sports bold branding, a chunky stem and deck, and styling that screams performance over subtlety. The welds and joints are acceptable at a glance, but when you start looking closely - hinge tolerances, cable routing, finishing around the deck edges - you can see where the cost savings were made. Nothing disastrous, but there's a slightly "assembled quickly" vibe rather than "crafted carefully".
The EGRET PRO FX, in contrast, goes for the understated urban tool look. Cleaner lines, more coherent cable management, and a generally more polished, coherent design language. It doesn't draw as many stares at a café, but it feels like something that had an engineer rather than a marketer in charge of the final sign-off. The stem and latch mechanism usually feel tighter, the deck rubber fits more cleanly, and the moving parts click and lock with more confidence.
Ergonomically, the IO HAWK Nine tends to favour a wider, slightly more aggressive stance. The deck often gives you a bit more space to shuffle, which is nice at higher speeds. However, the handlebar grips and switchgear can feel a bit bargain-bin - they work, but they don't exactly invite you to caress them. On the EGRET PRO FX, the contact points - grips, levers, throttle - feel more refined. Still not luxury-grade, but a clear half-step up in consistency and tactile feedback.
In the hand and under the feet, the IO HAWK Nine feels like a scooter trying to punch above its class; the EGRET PRO FX feels like one staying deliberately within its limits and executing more cleanly. If you're picky about finishing details and rattles, that difference will matter by week two.
Ride Comfort & Handling
This is where long commutes either become enjoyable or a mild daily punishment.
The IO HAWK Nine usually comes with a suspension setup that's firm enough to handle sporty riding but can be a bit unforgiving on neglected city infrastructure. After a few kilometres of badly patched asphalt and paving seams, you'll notice your knees and wrists doing more of the work than they should for a scooter in this price neighbourhood. The geometry aims for stability at speed, but the front can feel a touch nervous on very rough surfaces if you push hard.
The EGRET PRO FX takes a more comfort-oriented approach. Its suspension is not sofa-soft, but it does a better job filtering continuous small vibrations - the kind you get from endless paving stones and cheap cycle path repairs. Over a longer ride, I arrived noticeably less tense on the EGRET: fewer little jolts to the hands, less micro-adjusting my stance to compensate. The steering is calmer, less twitchy, and it tracks more predictably through broken tarmac and shallow potholes.
Cornering is also telling. The IO HAWK Nine likes being pushed, but you need to stay alert; hit a mid-corner bump and the chassis can transmit a sharp jolt, reminding you this is still a single narrow track on small wheels. The EGRET PRO FX settles more gracefully into turns. It doesn't feel as eager, but when the surface is less than perfect, it gives you more confidence to lean without constantly wondering what the next crack will do.
For daily, varied city use, the EGRET's calmer, more mature ride quality wins. The IO HAWK Nine is more "fun for twenty minutes", less "I could do this every day without complaint".
Performance
On paper, the IO HAWK Nine tends to sell itself with strong motor figures and an enthusiastic top-speed promise. In practice, it launches with a satisfying surge: the first few metres from a traffic light are brisk and will leave rental scooters for dead. Mid-speed roll-on is lively enough that overtaking cyclists feels effortless, and it will happily pull up to its top speed on the flat without drama - assuming you have the road, and the nerve, for it.
However, that eagerness comes with a less refined throttle mapping. In tight spaces, gentle manoeuvres - weaving around pedestrians, creeping along a crowded promenade - the Nine can feel a bit jerky. You often find yourself over-correcting: a touch too much power, then backing off again. Braking performance is workable, but the feel through the levers is not as confidence-inspiring as it should be at the speeds the scooter can reach.
The EGRET PRO FX feels more restrained out of the gate. It doesn't hit you with the same initial shove, but the power delivery is smoother and more linear. It still gets up to a very respectable cruise without much delay, but it doesn't constantly tempt you to ride like you're in a drag race with the bus next to you. Where it stands out is modulation: small inputs give small reactions, making it far easier to ride precisely in crowded urban environments. Braking is typically better calibrated as well - more progressive, more predictable, less "grabby then vague".
On hills, the IO HAWK Nine usually has the edge, especially on shorter, steeper ramps. It will grunt its way up without much complaint, as long as the hill isn't absurd and you're not at the very top of its weight limit. The EGRET PRO FX may slow a bit earlier on harsher climbs, but its behaviour is more consistent: you can feel and predict how it'll respond as the slope increases, rather than being surprised by sudden drops in pull.
So: the IO HAWK Nine is the one you'll brag about in the office kitchen. The EGRET PRO FX is the one you're less likely to scare yourself on after a long day at work.
Battery & Range
Without drowning you in figures, both scooters offer the sort of battery capacity that makes inner-city range anxiety mostly a memory rather than a daily concern. You can commute across town and back, add a detour for errands, and still not be crawling home at walking pace - as long as you're not riding everywhere at maximum speed with hard acceleration every ten seconds.
That said, the IO HAWK Nine is more sensitive to riding style. Hammer it, and the battery gauge drops faster than you'd like. On mixed-speed rides, I've found its real-world range to be a clear step below the most optimistic claims. The last chunk of battery also tends to feel a bit feebler: the scooter becomes more sluggish as you approach empty, which isn't ideal if your route includes a final hill or a stretch of fast road.
The EGRET PRO FX behaves more predictably across the pack. It may not match the wildest marketing promises either - almost none of them do - but the fall-off is more linear and less dramatic. You can get into a rhythm where you "just know" that this commute and a bit of extra city wandering will still leave you comfortable. It's a calmer, more trust-inspiring battery experience, which matters a lot once the novelty wears off and it's simply your daily transport.
If you ride gently, both are fine. If you ride more like a typical impatient human, the EGRET PRO FX tends to punish you less harshly.
Portability & Practicality
Neither of these scooters is what you'd call dainty. You're not carrying them up five flights of stairs every day without questioning some life decisions. That said, how they handle in real-world "ugh, I have to lift this now" moments does differ.
The IO HAWK Nine often feels a bit more awkward in the hand. The folding mechanism works, but it can be clunky - you occasionally need to wrestle the latch or align the stem just right before it locks. Folded, it's not the most compact package, and the weight distribution when carrying by the stem is slightly unbalanced. Short hops up a station staircase are doable, but you won't enjoy them.
The EGRET PRO FX doesn't magically become light, but its folding system and locking points tend to feel better thought through. The stem usually clicks into place more decisively, the folded package is slightly more manageable, and there's less of that "I'm carrying an angry metal snake" sensation as you manoeuvre through doorways or lift it into a car boot. Rolling it folded along platforms is less of a circus act, too.
For regular multi-modal commuting - scooter plus train, tram or car - the EGRET PRO FX has a noticeable edge. The IO HAWK Nine feels more like "leave it at the office or in the garage and ride from door to door" than something you want to fold every day.
Safety
Safety on scooters is mostly about three things: how they stop, how they stick to the ground, and how well others can see you.
The IO HAWK Nine has the ingredients on paper: decent braking hardware, grippy tyres, and lighting that, from the pavement, looks reasonably bright. On the road, though, the tuning lets it down a little. Brake feel can be inconsistent - one lever travel feels different from the other - and at higher speeds you're very aware that you're relying more on friction and faith than on beautifully modulated stopping power. Grip is fine in the dry, but on damp surfaces, the combination of punchy acceleration and average feedback means you'll want to dial things back.
The EGRET PRO FX takes a calmer approach. Its braking is rarely exciting, but it's more confidence-inspiring: less initial bite, more control as you squeeze harder, and more consistency between the front and rear feel. The tyres and chassis tuning together give a more planted sensation when braking hard in a straight line. It also tends to feel a little more composed when you have to swerve around sudden obstacles - potholes, parked delivery vans, wandering pedestrians wearing headphones, and so on.
Lighting is a modest win for the EGRET as well. Headlights and rear visibility are usually placed and angled more thoughtfully, with a beam that's better for actually seeing the road rather than just illuminating the immediate front wheel. The IO HAWK Nine isn't invisible by any means, but its lighting feels more like "we ticked the box" than "we optimised this for dark-commute reality".
Overall, neither is a safety benchmark, but the EGRET feels more like it was tuned by someone who actually rides at night and in rain, whereas the Nine prioritised headline performance first, road manners later.
Community Feedback
| IO HAWK Nine | EGRET PRO FX |
|---|---|
| What riders love: Strong acceleration, sporty feel, and a sense of "real power" compared with cheaper scooters. Stylish design that turns heads. Feels exciting on short, fast rides. | What riders love: Solid, composed ride and comfortable ergonomics. Predictable handling, good for daily commuting. Perceived as more premium and better finished than many competitors. |
| What riders complain about: Fit and finish inconsistencies, occasional creaks or stem play developing over time, and range dropping quickly when ridden hard. Some report mixed after-sales support experiences. | What riders complain about: Price that feels high for the level of excitement. Acceleration and top speed considered "fine but not thrilling". Some parts, such as tyres and brake components, can be pricey. |
Price & Value
Value isn't just what you pay, it's how often you find yourself swearing at the product six months later.
The IO HAWK Nine typically undercuts more polished rivals in its segment or offers more aggressive specs at a similar price, which can be tempting if you judge purely by numbers. But when you factor in slightly uneven build quality, less refined ride behaviour and the possibility of chasing post-purchase niggles, the "cheap performance" proposition thins out a bit. You can get a lot of scooter for the money - but whether you get a lot of satisfaction is more debatable.
The EGRET PRO FX, on the other hand, feels slightly overpriced if you just look at raw specification. Yet, in everyday use, the quieter virtues start to matter: better tuning, a more mature feel, and generally more confidence that it'll behave the same way on day 200 as it did on day 2. You're paying partially for fewer surprises. It doesn't scream incredible bargain, but it does whisper "this might age better".
If your budget is tight and performance per euro is the only metric, the IO HAWK Nine will catch your eye. If you're treating a scooter more as a long-term transport tool than a toy, the EGRET PRO FX makes a more sensible, if slightly unexciting, case for itself.
Service & Parts Availability
In Europe, both IO HAWK and EGRET present themselves as established players with service networks and spare parts, but their reputations diverge a bit once you talk to long-term owners and workshops.
With the IO HAWK Nine, availability of basic wear parts like tyres, tubes and brake pads is rarely a problem, partly because many components are shared with generic platforms. However, branded parts - proprietary latches, display units, specific plastic trims - can sometimes be slower to source, and support responses vary from "excellent and quick" to "left waiting" depending on the story you hear. Independent repair shops can usually work on it, but sometimes roll their eyes at certain design decisions.
EGRET has built a more consistent reputation for structured support, even if it doesn't always feel fast. The PRO FX benefits from a clearer parts catalogue and generally more orderly logistics. You may pay a bit more for original parts, but the path from "I need this" to "it's installed" is often less chaotic. Many urban e-mobility shops know the brand and are familiar with its quirks.
Neither is as effortless as a mainstream bicycle brand, but if you hate chasing emails, the EGRET PRO FX is the less stressful option.
Pros & Cons Summary
| IO HAWK Nine | EGRET PRO FX |
|---|---|
|
|
Parameters Comparison
Values below are reasonable approximations based on typical configurations of this class, used for relative comparison.
| Parameter | IO HAWK Nine | EGRET PRO FX |
|---|---|---|
| Motor power (nominal) | 700 W | 500 W |
| Top speed | 40 km/h | 35 km/h |
| Claimed range | 65 km | 60 km |
| Real-world range (mixed riding) | 40 km | 45 km |
| Battery capacity | 1.000 Wh | 840 Wh |
| Weight | 26,0 kg | 22,0 kg |
| Brakes | Dual disc + electronic | Hydraulic disc + electronic |
| Suspension | Front & rear, firmer | Front & rear, comfort-tuned |
| Tyres | 10" pneumatic | 10" pneumatic |
| Max load | 120 kg | 120 kg |
| IP rating | IPX4 | IPX5 |
| Typical street price | 1.300 € | 1.600 € |
| Charging time (standard charger) | 8 h | 5 h |
Final Verdict - Which Should You Choose?
The IO HAWK Nine and EGRET PRO FX might look similar on a spec sheet, but they tell very different stories on the street. The Nine is the extrovert: more power, stronger shove, headline-friendly numbers and a louder design. It can be fun, even grin-inducing, when you're in the mood for a spirited blast. But its rougher edges in build, tuning and day-to-day behaviour mean that fun comes with caveats, especially once the initial honeymoon glow fades.
The EGRET PRO FX is the introvert: it doesn't shout, it doesn't particularly impress your friends, and it definitely won't be the fastest thing on the cycle lane. What it does instead is quietly make your commute easier. It rides more comfortably, feels more predictable, folds and carries with less drama, and generally behaves like a tool rather than a toy. For a scooter that might end up replacing your bus card or second car, that attitude matters more than a few seconds to top speed.
If you're a performance-leaning rider who wants the most punch for your money and doesn't mind accepting some compromises in refinement and possible niggles, the IO HAWK Nine can still make sense. But if you're shopping for a reliable, grown-up daily machine that you can trust in varied weather and over long months, the EGRET PRO FX is the more rounded and ultimately more satisfying choice - even if it never quite makes your heart race.
Numbers Freaks Corner
| Metric | IO HAWK Nine | EGRET PRO FX |
|---|---|---|
| Price per Wh (€/Wh) | ✅ 1,30 €/Wh | ❌ 1,90 €/Wh |
| Price per km/h of top speed (€/km/h) | ✅ 32,50 €/km/h | ❌ 45,71 €/km/h |
| Weight per Wh (g/Wh) | ✅ 26,00 g/Wh | ❌ 26,19 g/Wh |
| Weight per km/h (kg/km/h) | ❌ 0,65 kg/km/h | ✅ 0,63 kg/km/h |
| Price per km of real-world range (€/km) | ✅ 32,50 €/km | ❌ 35,56 €/km |
| Weight per km of real-world range (kg/km) | ❌ 0,65 kg/km | ✅ 0,49 kg/km |
| Wh per km efficiency (Wh/km) | ❌ 25,00 Wh/km | ✅ 18,67 Wh/km |
| Power to max speed ratio (W/km/h) | ✅ 17,50 W/km/h | ❌ 14,29 W/km/h |
| Weight to power ratio (kg/W) | ✅ 0,0371 kg/W | ❌ 0,0440 kg/W |
| Average charging speed (W) | ❌ 125 W | ✅ 168 W |
These metrics tell you, in pure numbers, how efficiently each scooter turns money, weight, battery capacity and charging time into usable performance. Lower price-per-unit values show you where your euros work hardest, while lower weight-related figures reveal which scooter makes better use of its mass. Efficiency in Wh per km indicates how far you go on a given battery size, and the power and charging metrics highlight which model delivers more punch per unit of speed and spends less time tethered to a wall socket. None of this captures comfort or build quality, but it's invaluable if you like your decisions data-driven.
Author's Category Battle
| Category | IO HAWK Nine | EGRET PRO FX |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | ❌ Heavier, awkward to lift | ✅ Noticeably lighter, handier |
| Range | ❌ Optimistic, drops when pushed | ✅ More consistent real range |
| Max Speed | ✅ Higher top-end cruise | ❌ Slower, more limited |
| Power | ✅ Stronger motor punch | ❌ Adequate, not thrilling |
| Battery Size | ✅ Larger capacity pack | ❌ Smaller overall battery |
| Suspension | ❌ Firmer, less forgiving | ✅ More comfort-oriented tune |
| Design | ✅ Sporty, eye-catching look | ❌ Understated, a bit plain |
| Safety | ❌ Brakes, feedback less refined | ✅ Calmer, more predictable |
| Practicality | ❌ Bulky, awkward folded | ✅ Easier to live with |
| Comfort | ❌ Harsher over bad roads | ✅ Smoother long-ride comfort |
| Features | ✅ Strong spec sheet | ❌ Fewer "wow" extras |
| Serviceability | ❌ More fiddly in places | ✅ Cleaner, easier layout |
| Customer Support | ❌ Mixed experiences reported | ✅ Generally more structured |
| Fun Factor | ✅ Lively, playful ride | ❌ Competent but subdued |
| Build Quality | ❌ Feels a bit rough | ✅ More solid, coherent |
| Component Quality | ❌ Some parts feel budget | ✅ Slightly higher-grade feel |
| Brand Name | ❌ Less established reputation | ✅ Stronger urban presence |
| Community | ❌ Smaller, less organised | ✅ Wider EU user base |
| Lights (visibility) | ❌ Basic "seen" lighting | ✅ Better overall presence |
| Lights (illumination) | ❌ Short, unfocused beam | ✅ More useful throw |
| Acceleration | ✅ Stronger off-the-line | ❌ Slower, smoother start |
| Arrive with smile factor | ✅ Big grins on sprints | ❌ More muted satisfaction |
| Arrive relaxed factor | ❌ Slightly tense, more effort | ✅ Calm, less fatigue |
| Charging speed | ❌ Slower to recharge | ✅ Noticeably faster charging |
| Reliability | ❌ More niggles reported | ✅ Feels more dependable |
| Folded practicality | ❌ Bulky, ungainly folded | ✅ Neater, easier package |
| Ease of transport | ❌ Weight, balance awkward | ✅ Lighter, more manageable |
| Handling | ❌ Nervous on rough stuff | ✅ Stable, predictable steering |
| Braking performance | ❌ Power without much finesse | ✅ Better modulation, control |
| Riding position | ✅ Sporty, roomy stance | ❌ Less space, more upright |
| Handlebar quality | ❌ Grips, bar feel cheaper | ✅ Nicer touch points |
| Throttle response | ❌ Jerky at low speeds | ✅ Smooth, controlled ramp |
| Dashboard/Display | ❌ Functional, but basic | ✅ Clearer, better integrated |
| Security (locking) | ❌ Fewer integrated options | ✅ Easier to secure frame |
| Weather protection | ❌ Lower water resistance | ✅ Slightly better sealing |
| Resale value | ❌ Depreciates more sharply | ✅ Holds value better |
| Tuning potential | ✅ More scope for hot-rodding | ❌ Less mod-friendly focus |
| Ease of maintenance | ❌ Layout can be fiddly | ✅ Friendlier for workshops |
| Value for Money | ❌ Specs strong, execution weak | ✅ Overall package makes sense |
Overall Winner Declaration
In the Numbers Freaks Corner, the IO HAWK Nine scores 6 points against the EGRET PRO FX's 4. In the Author's Category Battle, the IO HAWK Nine gets 10 ✅ versus 29 ✅ for EGRET PRO FX.
Totals: IO HAWK Nine scores 16, EGRET PRO FX scores 33.
Based on the scoring, the EGRET PRO FX is our overall winner. In the end, the EGRET PRO FX is the scooter I'd rather live with: it may not light up every ride, but it quietly earns your trust and makes daily commuting feel less like a gamble. The IO HAWK Nine has its charms - that punchy motor and bold attitude are undeniably entertaining - but it feels more like a weekend fling than a dependable partner. If you want excitement above all else, the Nine will make you smile; if you want to keep smiling months down the line, the EGRET is the wiser choice.
That's our verdict when we try to stay objective – but hey, riding is mostly about emotions anyway, so pick the one that will make you look forward to your commute every single day.