Print

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

[Richard230]

My bike came with (what appears to be) a stock license plate mount fastened with two bolts to the rear fender. My dealer installed their shop's plastic license plate frame on the bracket, which now surrounds my new license plate.  Everything seems to fit perfectly.  Perhaps the bike plate mount is designed for the smaller CA plate?  Although it does have slotted mounting holes that would accommodate different sized license plates. You would think that it would be a DOT requirement that a license plate bracket be installed on the bike from the factory.

[dkw12002]

Regarding cost of the Zero. Commuting 50 miles each way 5 days a week, then putting another 500 miles pleasure riding each weekend is the way to get value out of the Zero. If you actually rode it 308,000 miles over 6 years, and the motor, controller and battery hold up 6 years, that would make it pretty economical. Compare that to say a Ninja 250 which is pretty cheap to buy ($4500). You would have to buy probably 3 or 4 of them to go 308,000 mi. with rebuilds and tuneups even then.  Gas alone would cost about $24,000 over 6 years. If you are a casual rider and put just a couple thousand miles a year on the Zero, it will be expensive on a per mile basis.

[protomech]

I've done about 6000 miles on my first gas bike over the last 2.5 years. About 900 in the last three months (temps in mid 30s-40s). I suspect I'll be riding a lot more now that I have my ebike, but not 60k miles/year : P

Somewhat back on topic:

First real trip, 44.7 miles to a friend's house and back tonight, used about 6.5 bars. Speeds 45-50 mph typically, 55-60 mph for a few miles. About half in sport and half in eco - very noticeable drop in < 10 mph power with eco. Temps around 80 degrees in the day, and 60 ish on the return ride home.

Extrapolating out: 76 miles of range. Not bad, not bad.

[Lipo423]

dkw12002,
You need to tell me how you put 500 miles over the weekend on your bike (riding-charging)?
We get 24h/day in Spain, so, I guess you enjoy longer days in where you live 

Just kidding...I understand what you mean, and I agree whith the level of use message/amortization.

In any case, what Zero is (still) offering today is more an "experience", than a real practical/economic vehicle...this will come in 4-5 years when technology & competition will meet together in Zero's office...and yes, I'm buying one now!


Protomech, yes, not bad at all...

[Richard230]

Well, you can tell by the number of replies to this thread what the main concern is when you buy an EV (no big surprise, of course).

I have managed to put 500 miles on my Zero during the past month just riding around the neighborhood visiting relatives and performing chores and I didn't even work at it.  Unfortunately, I am not putting very many miles on my car (less than 1000 miles last year), or my 5 IC motorcycles (about 2K miles each, except for 6K miles on the two BMWs due to attending rallies in other states during the summer).  I really need to trim my fleet a bit so that I can walk around my garage without bumping into handlebars or having to worry about acids eating away at the bearings in my bikes and my gasoline turning into alcohol-infused carbon-compound sludge.   

Riding electric makes life easier.  I wish the rain would stop so that I can go out riding again.   

I note that just a few miles from where Zero's factory is located, over 10 inches of rain has fallen since Tuesday.  I have had 4 inches so far at my home and the rain isn't expected to stop until next week.   

[manlytom]

Riding electric makes life easier.  I wish the rain would stop so that I can go out riding again.   

I note that just a few miles from where Zero's factory is located, over 10 inches of rain has fallen since Tuesday.  I have had 4 inches so far at my home and the rain isn't expected to stop until next week.   

We are having the wettest summers on record for many years, and flooding everywhere. Updated my raingear and keep riding ! The Zero works fine in the wet. Even managed to bypass a traffic jam on the flooded lane with nearly knee deep water --- the Zero just went through it no problem -- and I know the road well enough without seeing the surface that day -- as in no potholes etc.
So I guess riding in any condition ... and the Zero is much less to clean afterwards than my Harley.

[Richard230]

What I don't like about riding in the rain is the car/truck traffic around me.  Drivers have their heads where the sun don't shine when driving in the rain and a motorcyclist is just another obstacle to drive over.  If I was the only one on the road, I wouldn't mind riding in the rain, but not in an urban area with its fast and congested traffic.

And I agree. The Zero is very much easier to clean after a wet ride, compared with an IC motorcycle. Cleaning exhaust pipes and engine nook and crannies is a real pain when those hot parts are exposed to wet roads, oil emulsion and dirt.

[protomech]

We are having the wettest summers on record for many years, and flooding everywhere. Updated my raingear and keep riding ! The Zero works fine in the wet. Even managed to bypass a traffic jam on the flooded lane with nearly knee deep water --- the Zero just went through it no problem -- and I know the road well enough without seeing the surface that day -- as in no potholes etc.

Seconded.. started to thunderstorm shortly before I was ready to leave from work .. and then hail. Turns out, the Zero works okay in pretty terrible conditions : P

(if was stuck in the middle of evening rush traffic, I'd have waited that out .. agree about avoiding cars on the road when it's storming)

[oobflyer]

While my ZF9 is in the shop next week they are going to "download" the logs from the bike to check for any other problems (besides the throttle 'glitch'). They are doing this at my request to try to explain the discrepancy between Zero's range claims and my "real world" range. However, since I made the request I received an email from Zero with a link to the EPA website that explains how they calculated the range:

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/light-duty/udds.htm

The average speed is less than 20 miles/hour, which, I think, explains why it's not realistic to expect to ever achieve 114 miles per charge in real-world riding.

I'm not complaining about the bike - I love this thing - but I wonder if EV manufacturers would have better success by advertising the real world range, along with the 'best case scenario' range, to avoid disappointment....

[Richard230]

I rode my ZF9 to a friend's funeral yesterday. The round trip was 50 miles, with most of the distance traveled at an average of 35 mph and five miles on the freeway at 70 mph. I still had 6 bars left on the "fuel" gauge by the time I had returned home and it took 4.85 kWh to replenish the battery pack from the wall outlet, or 4.37 kWh, if we assume 90% charger efficiency.  That sounds very close to Zero's range and battery capacity claims for the ZF9 to me.

As far as the government range standards go, I think it is about time they developed a more realistic "highway" rating.  It might not look pretty for advertising claims, but it would be more realistic for freeway-capable electric vehicles and more fair for the consumer who is not all that familiar with traveling at 20 mph to get where they want to go.   

[ZeroSinMA]

Thanks much for the report and the link to the Zero test. I have a different interpretation of the test. The test posted below looks rigorous enough but the shortness of it means the EPA had to extrapolate the results by more than 15x to arrive at 114. That creates a large margin of error that may explain the differences between the EPA estimate and riders' actual experience.

The test subjects the bike to 18 starts and stops over a period of 23 minutes over a distance of 7.45 miles.

1. Hard acceleration to 20MPH then acceleration to 30MPH over 90 seconds, then rapid deceleration to zero.
2. Hard acceleration to 37MPH, then again to 56MPH and coast over 60 seconds, then rapid deceleration to zero.
3. Hard acceleration to 35MPH, then rapid deceleration to zero.
4. Hard acceleration to 30MPH, then rapid deceleration to zero.
5. Hard acceleration to 35MPH, cruise for 30 seconds, then rapid deceleration to zero.
6. Hard acceleration to 25MPH, then rapid deceleration to zero.

And so on. So, yes, the average speed was 20 but the way the bike achieved that was via many power-intensive rapid starts, accelerations, and stops. Maybe the test used 5% to 10% of the total charge. If they started with the assumption that the 7.45 mile test consumed 10% of total charge then the total range estimate would have been 75 miles or if they started with 5% then 20 x 7.45 = 149 miles. The 114 mile official estimate implies that the EPA extrapolated total range per the test above consuming ~7% of total charge for 7.45 miles times 15.3 = 114 miles at 100% discharge. The methodology produced a wide range of error.

[protomech]

I believe the UDDS calls for the driving schedule to be repeated until the battery is depleted.

[ZeroSinMA]

If that's the case then if anything you'd expect the average owner to achieve a range in excess of 112 miles. By repeating the 7.45 mile, 23 minute test 15 times to discharge the battery 100% in 112 miles per the standard requires 270 starts and stops over 5.75 hours, including 15 hard accelerations from zero to 55MPH to zero and 45 hard accelerations from zero to 35MPH to zero. Not likely.

Bottom line, I don't see how the EPA gets from the 7.45 mile, 23 minute test schedule reliably to a 112 mile range estimate.

Zero should allow customers to register to the web site and log trips to develop range profiles for their bikes over time. What say we lobby them to do it?

[protomech]

The "hard acceleration" from zero to 55 mph takes place over 66 seconds - from 163s - 229s.
http://www.epa.gov/nvfel/methods/uddscol.txt

The fifth acceleration takes you from 0 - 35 mph in 15s (447 - 462s).

Here's the relevant snip from the MIC test protocol:

For vehicles subject to the driving schedule in 40CFR86 Appendix I(b), the driving schedule shall be repeated until the vehicle is no longer able to reach a speed of at least 53.9 mph (86.7 km/hr) between second number 226 and second number 254 of the driving schedule or the illumination of a warning light informing the operator that operation should be terminated for safety reasons or to avoid permanent battery damage. Speed variations greater than the tolerances specified in Appendix I that occur during gear changes or braking spikes are acceptable, provided they occur for less than 2 seconds on any occasion and are clearly documented as to the time and speed at that point of the driving schedule.

...

Range Calculation. The range value is determined by measuring the total number of revolutions of the dynamometer roller from the start of the test until the point at which the vehicle is no longer able to maintain the speed and time requirements specified. Based on the distance travelled per revolution of the dynamometer roller and the total number of revolutions, the distance travelled shall be reported in units of miles or kilometers, rounded to the nearest whole number. It is recommended that the calculated value be characterized as “city driving range, starting with a fully-charged battery.”

Emphasis added.

Here's the relevant bit from 40CFR86 Appendix I:

(b) EPA Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule for Light-Duty Vehicles, Light-Duty Trucks, and Motorcycles with engine displacements equal to or greater than 170 cc (10.4 cu. in.).
(c) EPA Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule for motorcycles with engine displacements less than 170 cc (10.4 cu. in.).

Despite not having a displacement, I believe the Zero S / DS were tested under the driving schedule in 40CFR86 Appendix I(b), which is the UDDS graphed above. The MIC specifies that a "low speed driving cycle ... is used for vehicles with a top speed below 56.7 mph but not less than 20.0 mph.", which I suppose is the driving schedule specified in Appendix I(c).

[ZeroSinMA]

Thanks for digging up the data. Not hard acceleration but exceedingly slow acceleration... unnaturally slow. No one takes 77 secs to hit 57MPH or 34 secs to get to 36MPH. If you're getting on a highway you're going to get hurt doing that. YOu have more like 10 seconds. That may explain why real world riders get less range.

They did this over and over, 14 times 23 minutes for 336 minutes or 5.6 hours. Talk about a boring job.