ElectricMotorcycleForum.com

  • January 18, 2018, 05:41:02 AM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Electric Motorcycle Forum is live!

Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5  (Read 1325 times)

Richard230

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
    • View Profile
MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« on: September 29, 2016, 05:05:56 AM »

The September issue of Motorcycle Consumer News contains a fully-instrumented test of the two-battery pack FXS.  The test provides the following hard data: Measured top speed 83 mph; 1/4 mile in 14.90 sec @ 83 mph; 0-60 mph = 5.5 seconds; braking from 60 mph with the ABS on required 141 feet to come to a stop; the speedometer read 65 mph at an actual 64 mph; measured weight was 295 pounds.  Power generated was 44 hp and torque reached 70 lb-ft.  I have attached a photo of their dyno chart (which is something that you don't see very often in a magazine review of an electric motorcycle).

What they liked: Great torque and smooth power delivery; Simple and efficient; Dead silent.
What they didn't like: Range anxiety; Charge time; Overheating can shut off throttle.

The review was generally positive, but the reviewer had an issue with a complete throttle shutdown when the motor overheated during quarter-mile testing. He reproduced the shutdown on two other FXS models. Also, the editor received a ticket for using an exterior 120V outlet for "EV charging" at his office building. (Apparently that is not permitted at the building where he works and the security staff unplugged his charger after it only charged 4%.)  He managed to make it home with the display reading 0% and that was the last time he tried commuting on the FXS. Range is listed as 30 to 70 miles, depending on how fast the bike travels.

I think the article may contain some technical errors as it mentions that the bike uses the IPM motor and that the Charge Tank is available as an accessory.   ???  In general the editor liked the FXS, but felt it had a number of limitations for many types of riding.
Logged
Richard's motorcycle collection:  2018 16.6 kWh Zero S, 2016 BMW R1200RS, 2011 Royal Enfield Bullet 500 Classic, 2009 BMW F650GS, 2005 Triumph T-100 Bonneville, 2002 Yamaha FZ1 (FZS1000N) and a 1978 Honda Kick 'N Go Senior.

mrwilsn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 670
  • 2014 Zero S / 2017 Zero SR
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2016, 05:10:42 AM »



I think the article may contain some technical errors as it mentions that the bike uses the IPM motor and that the Charge Tank is available as an accessory.   ???

The FX doesn't use an IPM but the FXS does.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Logged
2014 Zero S

Richard230

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2016, 06:28:52 AM »



I think the article may contain some technical errors as it mentions that the bike uses the IPM motor and that the Charge Tank is available as an accessory.   ???

The FX doesn't use an IPM but the FXS does.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Well then, it appears that the IPM motor still has some overheating issues.   ???
Logged
Richard's motorcycle collection:  2018 16.6 kWh Zero S, 2016 BMW R1200RS, 2011 Royal Enfield Bullet 500 Classic, 2009 BMW F650GS, 2005 Triumph T-100 Bonneville, 2002 Yamaha FZ1 (FZS1000N) and a 1978 Honda Kick 'N Go Senior.

mrwilsn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 670
  • 2014 Zero S / 2017 Zero SR
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #3 on: September 29, 2016, 06:48:39 AM »



I think the article may contain some technical errors as it mentions that the bike uses the IPM motor and that the Charge Tank is available as an accessory.   ???

The FX doesn't use an IPM but the FXS does.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Well then, it appears that the IPM motor still has some overheating issues.   ???
I haven't read the article so I don't know what they actually said about over heating....but if it was just a generic "it over heated" then my bet is on the batteries.  With only 2 bricks the FXS batteries will get hot if you push the bike really hard.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Logged
2014 Zero S

KrazyEd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2016, 06:56:56 AM »

It would be interesting to know how much time was given between rounds.
Even on ICE vehicles, you generally wait a while between passes. If they
were the only ones at a rented track, they may have been trying to do back
to back passes.
Logged

MostlyBonkers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1075
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #5 on: September 29, 2016, 10:23:01 AM »

Do you get MCN in the States Richard? I thought it was a British publication.

Thanks for posting. I thought the motor was capable of 54 hp, so I'm surprised they only measured 44 at the back wheel. Let me check...

I stand corrected! I wonder why they would limit the FXS motor to 10 hp less than on the S and DS? Battery limitations from only two bricks perhaps?

It's great to see that the dyno test reveals exactly the same results as Zero's specs. No losses from the drivetrain, which is fantastic!

They have an FXS at Daytona motorcycles (new Zero dealership in London not far from me). I'm sorely tempted to take it for a test ride. I probably shouldn't... ;-)
Logged

MajorMajor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #6 on: September 29, 2016, 02:36:42 PM »

Quote
0-60 mph = 5.5 seconds

I noticed this on my FXS.
It's far from the 3.8 seconds zero is claiming.
And it's not like you need a ton of technique (which I assume MCN has), since you don't have to shift gears.
I'm a light weight rider to boot...

I am honestly disappointed with the acceleration, it's not what I was sold.
Logged

Fred

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #7 on: September 29, 2016, 07:11:56 PM »



They have an FXS at Daytona motorcycles (new Zero dealership in London not far from me). I'm sorely tempted to take it for a test ride. I probably shouldn't... ;-)

I took that bike for a test ride last Saturday. Very nice. Had a quick back-to-back comparison with their DSR to see how different it would feel power-wise to the SR I'm also considering.

I did have one moment when full throttle at about 75-80mph when there was a bit of a pop and a sudden reduction in power. It felt a bit sudden to be a thermal limit and never happened again.
Logged

Richard230

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #8 on: September 29, 2016, 08:47:34 PM »

Motorcycle Consumer News is a U.S. subscription-only monthly publication whose claim to fame is that it contains no advertising and is solely supported by subscriber payments.  It is similar in concept to Consumer Reports, but only covers motorcycles and related products and subjects.

Here is the overheating quote from the article. After mentioning the thermal cutback when under full throttle at top speed the editor goes on to say: "The real problem was under heavy stress, after repeated quarter-mile attempts, the overheat condition shut the throttle down completely - the speedometer read 0 and the bike would continue decelerating. After coming to a stop, the throttle would not re-engage (with) the fist twist, but releasing it and twisting it again would bring the bike back to life.  I was able to reproduce this on two different bikes.  I feared an overheat could shut the throttle off at freeway speed, causing the bike to slow, without the benefit of a brake light.  This could lead to a dangerous situation for the rider.  Thankfully, I didn't experience it outside of abusive testing. Zero recommends a maximum sustained speed of 75 mph and I would encourage riders to consider their usage before choosing a limit."  (I assume he was referring to selecting top speed in the custom mode.)

This a new editor of the magazine and I believe this may be the first time he has ever ridden an electric motorcycle before. The previous editor had performed several Zero and Brammo evaluations over the past four or five years and no doubt had more experience with evaluating electric vehicles - including allowing them to cool down a bit between quarter-mile runs.  ;)
Logged
Richard's motorcycle collection:  2018 16.6 kWh Zero S, 2016 BMW R1200RS, 2011 Royal Enfield Bullet 500 Classic, 2009 BMW F650GS, 2005 Triumph T-100 Bonneville, 2002 Yamaha FZ1 (FZS1000N) and a 1978 Honda Kick 'N Go Senior.

grmarks

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #9 on: October 01, 2016, 09:42:41 AM »

Quote
0-60 mph = 5.5 seconds

I noticed this on my FXS.
It's far from the 3.8 seconds zero is claiming.
And it's not like you need a ton of technique (which I assume MCN has), since you don't have to shift gears.
I'm a light weight rider to boot...

I am honestly disappointed with the acceleration, it's not what I was sold.

When testing acceleration times the riders weight is very important (also any accessories that add weight).
If you are going to print a time (fastest time possible) then you use the lightest rider possible. Everyone else does.
I expect the time is correct, its just that most people weight more and get a slower time. Doesn't make Zero's claim wrong.
I think its a pointless exercise to time acceleration because everyone will get a different time.   
Logged

Shadow

  • Tip Overs: 10
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 704
  • Zero 2016 DSR ZF13.0
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #10 on: October 01, 2016, 11:07:59 AM »

When testing acceleration times the riders weight is very important (also any accessories that add weight).

The rider from Zero for the official MY2016 performance testing weighs less than my petite ex-girlfriend of 162cm.

Hopefully the future model year will perform better. It doesn't have to get better times 0-100kph the just the same published acceleration with a longer and more lumpy rider.
Logged

Richard230

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2016, 07:49:34 PM »

Quote
0-60 mph = 5.5 seconds

I noticed this on my FXS.
It's far from the 3.8 seconds zero is claiming.
And it's not like you need a ton of technique (which I assume MCN has), since you don't have to shift gears.
I'm a light weight rider to boot...

I am honestly disappointed with the acceleration, it's not what I was sold.

When testing acceleration times the riders weight is very important (also any accessories that add weight).
If you are going to print a time (fastest time possible) then you use the lightest rider possible. Everyone else does.
I expect the time is correct, its just that most people weight more and get a slower time. Doesn't make Zero's claim wrong.
I think its a pointless exercise to time acceleration because everyone will get a different time.

The editor who performed the acceleration tests is 6'-something tall and weighs 190 pounds.  Plus, the bike was stock and did not have even a windshield to hide his bulk.  So there is that.....   ::)
Logged
Richard's motorcycle collection:  2018 16.6 kWh Zero S, 2016 BMW R1200RS, 2011 Royal Enfield Bullet 500 Classic, 2009 BMW F650GS, 2005 Triumph T-100 Bonneville, 2002 Yamaha FZ1 (FZS1000N) and a 1978 Honda Kick 'N Go Senior.

Kocho

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #12 on: October 01, 2016, 08:45:45 PM »

That's real life performance ;) These are very close to my stats, and I feel (never measured) my '15 SR is probably at least 1.5 seconds slower than advertised. It would be nice to have the acceleration numbers listed for several ride weights, just like they range have the range listed for several riding situations (city, highway, mixed).

The editor who performed the acceleration tests is 6'-something tall and weighs 190 pounds.  Plus, the bike was stock and did not have even a windshield to hide his bulk.  So there is that.....   ::)
Logged
'15 Zero SR

grmarks

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #13 on: October 01, 2016, 09:55:15 PM »

There is a good hint about acceleration, when you add 20kg (power tank) the bike goes from 3.3 to 3.9. So if you weight 20kg more than the test rider then you will get 3.9 for 0-100km/h. I think all the information you need is in the specs sheet.
Logged

MajorMajor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: MCN tests the 2016 Zero FXS ZF6.5
« Reply #14 on: October 02, 2016, 12:39:00 PM »

Zero has done an amazing job in detailing the range data, it seems to be very accurate.
It's just disappointing to see that the accuracy isn't applied to all the specs.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3