Let's take the 2018 Zero DS and DSR for example. In the US for that year both had Zero's 14.4 kWh battery.
The motor and controller were the difference in the two bikes' performance levels. It made it easier for them to build up a lot of the same battery packs but they had to have two "shelves" for different motors and controllers.
A Tesla S85 and their P100D also clearly have more than "just" a different battery pack.
Damon's approach uses the same HyperDrive unit for all variants with the battery cell configuration being the difference.
Looks like I was unclear. The battery config is not the only difference.
If max power is different but the motor & inverter are physically the same, it's SW-configured; nothing unique to Damon about that.
Tesla has has several cases where two different models had the same physical motor, but a SW limitation on how much power they would let through the inverter.
The Hyundai Kona EV has two variants, one with a 39kWh battery & 100kW motor, and the other 64kWh battery & 150kW;
AFAIK, the motor is the same physically, a giveaway is that the peak torque is identical.
However, I'd certainly consider the HV cables to be part of the drivetrain. If all three variants have the same cables, the two lower-power ones are overs-pecified, meaning the cables are both more expensive & heavier (lots of copper) than they need to be; maybe the difference isn't that much, I'm not sure.
This allows bulk builds for the units and bulk buys for battery cells which should help to keep costs and manufacturing complexity down.
Yes, but apart from the inventory commonality, there is still the extra engineering complexity of the software.
You either need 3 different SW builds for the 3 variants, which is a pain (and every time you make a change, you really need to test all three separately, as edge cases might be very different: The bike variants have different weights, different acceleration envelopes, different motor-heating curves and so on.)
I'll buy that the adjustable-ergonomics system is independent of the power/battery variant (it also needs SW, by the way, to deal with issues, e.g., one of the motors doesn't work, so you don't want, say, footpegs changing and handlebars not, or, even worse, the left footpeg changing and right one not).
However, the Situational Awareness system does need to know the bike's performance envelope in terms of acceleration & braking, in order to identify threats.
For a SW-heavy product, this is a configuration management nightmare. As a former SW professional, this is a no-no for a small company, particularly one making a safety-critical product.
Wavelet have you applied to take a test ride?
I'm two continents too far for that, unfortunately. I'll have to live vicariously through you folks