Print

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

[Richard230]

Motorcyclist magazine has a Zero S for long-term testing and they have an up-date article in their September issue's "MC Garage" section near the rear of the magazine. To date they have ridden the PT-equipped S a total of 1500 miles.  The rider is Ari Henning. He says he was curious to know how the Zero performed compared with an "average" IC motorcycle.  He mounted a VBOX Sport GPS datalogger to the Zero and then to a Yamaha FZ-07.  The FZ-07 accelerated from a stop to 30 mph in 2.2 seconds and to 60 mph in 4.6 seconds.  The Zero S in "sport" mode got to 30 mph in 3.1 seconds and to 60 mph in 6.5 seconds. The author notes that the Yamaha weighs 400 pounds and the Zero weighs 452 pounds (is that an SR?).  (He doesn't say how much he weighs.)   

[protomech]

Nope, 452 pounds is the spec weight of a 2015 S + PT. 5.8 seconds is the spec 0-60 time.
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php

3.1 seconds to 30, 6.5 seconds to 60 is pretty linear. I think the 2012 falls off more quickly than that, even ignoring aero drag.

FZ-07 dynos at about 65 hp at the rear wheel, while the zero is probably around 50 hp.

[KrazyEd]

   Zero Claims 5.8 seconds Zero to 60 for Model S with power tank, so, pretty much inline.
One thing about no transmission electric vehicles, pretty much anyone can get appropriate
results.  With an ICE vehicle, everything has to be perfect, with electric, it is point and click.
I have a Grand National that runs 11 second quarter mile times. Very similar to LIMITED
Tesla P85D runs that complete the entire run, not, just Zero to 60. My Buick does this
with proper tire pressure, proper burn out, proper track prep, and a PERFECT launch.
Put Grandma in the Tesla, and, she can do it on a side street.
With stock gearing, my FX would want to wheelie from a hard start, even with both
batteries. I am guessing that with the added weight, accidental wheelie or tire spin
may be less of a problem on the Model S.

[Richard230]

The article says that the FZ-07 makes a measured-at-the-rear-wheel 66 hp and 45.5 lb-ft of torque.  Of course, the Yamaha is probably using just first, second and maybe a bit of third gear to reach 60 mph.  The article also mentions that Zero claims 54 hp and 68 lb-ft for the S. No doubt it would take some thinking to understand how the torque/power multiplication of the gearbox affects the results, especially as they are not linear during the acceleration while you are each gear on a highly-tuned and "revy" IC motorcycle like the Yamaha. My guess it that the calculations would require some calculus to evaluate. 

[Doug S]

When I first bought my '14 SR, I was confused by the whole torque/power thing. How could my bike put out more torque than a Hayabusa, and yet not be able to wheelie? And with such a skinny back tire, produce at most a small chirp when launched at full throttle? My college degree is actually a B.A. Physics degree, so I knew the answer probably was all about gearing, but it took a lot of reading -- there's a lot of misinformation out there -- to finally sort out what's going on.

Low gearing can multiply the torque a motor puts out, but it also reduces the distance over which it does so. Dimensionally, the units of torque are force times distance, so a different gear can increase the force by effectively changing the lever arm length. Makes sense, right? Lower gear, harder launches because of higher torque at the rear wheel, but lower top speed before the motor winds out. Higher gear, lower torque at the rear wheel, but higher top speed. The reason ICE vehicles require gearboxes is that they have to have this torque multiplication -- a gear high enough to give the vehicle a reasonable top speed produces far too little torque at lower speeds to make the vehicle driveable. An EV can get by without a gearbox because it doesn't need torque multiplication at low speeds, since its motor puts out full torque right down to 0 rpm. On my SR, that isn't enough torque to spin the rear wheel, but it's plenty for a nice, hard, but controllable launch.

Horsepower, however, is unaffected by gearing. Mathematically, power is energy output per second, and gearing can't affect the speed at which a motor puts out energy. A vehicle's top gear is correct when the motor puts out its maximum power just as the vehicle's speed requires that amount of power to overcome drag. Improperly gearing a vehicle may mean that the maximum available power is never achieved, but it has no effect on the power maximum itself.

So if our bikes had gearboxes, like the Brammos do, we could launch harder, but we'd lose time shifting, and perhaps wouldn't show much improvement in 0-60 times. Top speed would be unaffected, and because of that, quarter-mile times would be mostly unaffected as well.

[KrazyEd]

Keep in mind, with an ICE bike, you are revving the motor until you hit max torque, then, dumping the clutch at that point.
You have max torque with Zero, but, you aren't hammering it. I always tell people to take their bike, put it in whatever
gear will top 100 mph, then, see how well it launches. Probably 3rd gear on the 'Busa.

[Cortezdtv]

To me a gas 3 sec 0-60 is much more impressive than an electric 3 sec 0-60


With electric, honestly I expect it!

[Justin Andrews]

To me a gas 3 sec 0-60 is much more impressive than an electric 3 sec 0-60


With electric, honestly I expect it!

Its always impressive when obsolete technology does well...
I mean 0-60 in 3secs with a steam powered bike would be even more impressive. :p

[Burton]

Its always impressive when obsolete technology does well...
I mean 0-60 in 3secs with a steam powered bike would be even more impressive. :p

And catastrophic if something went wrong >__<

[Cortezdtv]

I more so look at it from the fact of which has a "greater" peak in acceleration; gas will basically always win,0-30 the electric will bac silly 99% of the time be out ahead, so by 30-60 the gas car is making up more time than the electric did, ie pulling harder, has more peak acceleration

Which to me is fast. I could care less about going 120+. We arnt on the track nor do you really need high speed hearing on a zero much; the sacrifice off the line is quite substantial.  The speed limit is only 65-75 if you are lucky, so it's all about how fast you get there

[dkw12002]

Not wanting to draw attention to myself in case a traffic cop is lurking, I know I routinely accelerate faster in town on my 2013 Zero S 8.5 than I did on my FZ07 and do on my 2015 Gixxer 600 even though the Gixxer is capable of accelerating much faster, in part because the Gixxer redlines at 15,250 rpms which means there is no shifting necessary to get to 60 mph. I mention the race bike only because Zero S has been compared to a 600 race bike previously, but that is far from true. In fairness, sometimes when people say 600s, they are probably confusing the in-line four 600 race bikes with bikes like the SV650. Cornering and high speed is another matter. The suspension and road stability at higher speeds is just not there on the Zero S. The Gixxer weighs 412 lbs. wet. My Zero is 355 lbs. The Zero S is a much better city bike than the Gixxer or the Yamaha, but once you hit the highway, the opposite is true. Just speaking of acceleration, under 80 mph the Zero also has a nice burst of power or roll-on. After 80, when the ICE bikes are just waking up to their higher power band, my Zero has about had it. I find traffic in the passing lane of I-35 routinely travels at 85 mph which is eating up battery and stretching the upper heat limit and suspension of the Zero S. They are just completely different packages in many regards. I always say a guy needs an assortment of different bikes for different occasions.

[Justin Andrews]

Its always impressive when obsolete technology does well...
I mean 0-60 in 3secs with a steam powered bike would be even more impressive. :p

And catastrophic if something went wrong >__<

0-60 in 3secs on a steam engine might only BE possible if something went catastrophically wrong. Well at least parts of you might get to 60 in even less than three seconds, and that counts... right?

[SRich]

From a Cycleworld.com review of the Zero S:
The Zero really impresses when you whack the “throttle” (rheostat?) open between 30 and 60 mph. In fact, the S's roll-on acceleration times are amazing: 40–60 mph takes just 1.94 sec. and 60–80 only 2.68. That's better than a Suzuki Hayabusa's top-gear roll-on time, main difference being that the 'Busa will keep pulling sixth all the way to its electronically limited top speed of 186 mph

[grmarks]

DKW12002 I have read many articles and watched lots of video that compares an SR to a 600. Are you sure you are not confusing the S with the SR? The S does not compare to a 600 cc bike.

[KrazyEd]

It isn't a Steam Engine, but, it is an older idea. I believe that Chrysler produced some Turbine powered cars in the early 1960s.
I don't know about Zero to 60, but, it does a 233 mph from a dead stop in ONE mile.

http://www.gizmag.com/road-legal-madmax-turbine-motorcycle-speed-record/37954/