Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[blake]

Anyone see the 5-page review of the 2012 Zero S (a black ZF9) in the latest issue of Cycle World magazine? It's quite a favourable review. Good to see this getting into the mainstream press.

Email me at oakvilleblake[at]me.com if you want a scanned copy (file too big to upload here even after file size reduction).

blake

[Richard230]

I haven't seen it yet.  My subscription expired last month and somehow CW forgot to send me the customary three or four notices to renew. After realizing that I was missing the magazine, I renewed my subscription and hope to get that issue soon. I am really looking forward to reading the review. Can you summarize the bike's performance statistics for us, Blake?  Say actual weight, top speed, 1/4 mile and range.  I am getting tired of trying to guess these statistics based upon me just riding around.   

It is a good thing that Zero is giving the magazines test bikes to review before the Empulse R comes out and steals its thunder.

[protomech]

Weight 339 lbs
Measured top speed 84 mph
1/4 mile 17.6s @ 77 mph (not bad, sim said 17.4 @ 78)
0-60 9.3s
Range 64/48/56 mi hi/low/avg

[Richard230]

I am surprised and gratified that the actual weight and top speed conform to Zero's claims. That is not always the case with other brands. The range seems about right, considering that the magazine testers treat their test bikes a lot harder than most owners.

The 1/4 mile and 0-60 performance is almost exactly what a 1964 Honda 250 Hawk did in a contemporary road test by Cycle World. That bike made about 24 HP at the crankshaft, had a 4-speed transmission and weighed about the same as the Zero.

[blake]

here's the stats box from the article (now let's see if I can upload a small pdf file...)

[Richard230]

Thanks Blake, that worked fine.

[Richard230]

I just looked at the CW spec. sheet for the ZF9 Zero S and noticed that the battery capacity is given as "9.8 KW-h".   

[Marshm]

I noticed at 60mph, the engine is at 4000rpm.  From the graph, above 3500 rpm, power and torque appear to be falling off.  I wonder if it is still drawing the same power from the battery, yet outputs less.  Might be a reason people have worse range at higher speeds.

[protomech]

Maybe not the same power, but probably the motor is a little less efficient at higher RPM.

Wonder if Zero offers a higher-tooth sprocket that would slow acceleration a little but improve highway range.

[Biff]

Maybe not the same power, but probably the motor is a little less efficient at higher RPM.

Wonder if Zero offers a higher-tooth sprocket that would slow acceleration a little but improve highway range.

Re gearing for the most efficient highway (70mph) range may get you another 3-4percent range (1 - 2 miles), and maybe increase your 0-60mph time by a second.  Getting in a tuck can increase your highway range by 20% (8 miles) and costs nothing but your comfort.  Headwinds, road conditions, clothing, rider weight, tire pressure and other factors that can change each ride would have a larger effect on range than gearing.  No matter how you look at it, range at highway speed is always going to be significantly less than range at 45mph, and optimizing for highway range will sacrifice the off-the-line feel of the bike.

-ryan

[protomech]

Yeah. I think the S's current gearing is a good compromise, in my real-world riding the S is faster than the DS, simply because I accelerate more often from 40+ mph than from 0 mph. It just might be nice to re-gear for

For maximum range, I'd be riding with a tuck at the slowest safe speed anyhow (50 mph, some bursts up to 60 mph).

[blake]

For maximum range, I'd be riding with a tuck at the slowest safe speed anyhow (50 mph, some bursts up to 60 mph).

Well, I admire your commitment and share your enthusiasm for finding the limits of maximum range, but every time I go out I can't seem to stop myself from really wicking up the pace and blasting around, especially on the highway, where I find this bike (and roll-on acceleration at those speeds for darting between vehicles) a really hoot. I also consider it my duty to show how unwimpy electric can be! :-)  I try to be more responsible in the future... ;-)

[CliC]

Getting in a tuck can increase your highway range by 20% (8 miles) and costs nothing but your comfort.

Well, maybe your dignity too on a DS. Depends on how dorky you think you look tucking on a dual-sport If I were two bars and 20 miles from home, though, I'd do it without  asecond thought.

[protomech]

For maximum range, I'd be riding with a tuck at the slowest safe speed anyhow (50 mph, some bursts up to 60 mph).

Well, I admire your commitment and share your enthusiasm for finding the limits of maximum range, but every time I go out I can't seem to stop myself from really wicking up the pace and blasting around, especially on the highway, where I find this bike (and roll-on acceleration at those speeds for darting between vehicles) a really hoot. I also consider it my duty to show how unwimpy electric can be! :-)  I try to be more responsible in the future... ;-)

Oh, I blast around and give the bike plenty of WOT too.. when I know I have plenty of battery to burn up : )

My objective is to take the bike on a 83 mile (one way!) trip, approximately 70 of which is on state highways.. average speed around 50 mph, some 500+ foot elevation gains. I figure it will be very tight .. I may well stop and charge halfway for an hour or so, get lunch etc, just to be safe.

[blake]

My objective is to take the bike on a 83 mile (one way!) trip, approximately 70 of which is on state highways.. average speed around 50 mph, some 500+ foot elevation gains. I figure it will be very tight .. I may well stop and charge halfway for an hour or so, get lunch etc, just to be safe.

Good luck with that - I look forward to reading about the results here!