Print

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

[Richard230]

Motorcycle Consumer News has performed a full instrumented test of the 2014 Zero SR with a "power tank", starting on page 20 of their September 2014 issue.  It should be no surprise to anyone here that they were not happy with the Fastace suspension, the rear brake and the Road Winner tires.  They say that these components should be much better quality for the high ($19,490) cost of the bike.  The suspension had stiff compression action when hitting sharp bumps, the front forks had too much "striction" (the forks were apparently misaligned, but resolving that issue didn't help too much).  They felt that the rear brake took too much effort and felt "wooden". Braking performance by their expert braking guy posted a best of 132 feet from a speed of 60 mph (which is about 10 feet longer than some other bikes that they have tested in the past). They also didn't care for the seat all that much. Overheating the motor was also noted when running hard. Finally, they felt that the purchase price was too much for what you get.  So that is about all of the negatives in the 4-page test.

However, there were lots of positive comments, particularly regarding the power train and the bike's useful range - especially compared with the 2011 Zero, which was the last Zero that they tested.  They were very impressed with the technological improvements made over the past 3 years. Here are some hard numbers:

105 lb.-ft. of torque at zero rpm.

109.2 lb.-ft. of torque at 3500 rpm.  (More torque than almost any IC motorcycle, including the Suzuki Hayabusa and most larger cruisers. It had the 8th best torque numbers of any bike they had tested.)

72.79 hp at 3900 rpm.

This is interesting:  They say that maximum regeneration produces 5 kW of power.

Measured weight is 447.5 pounds, with 52.7% of this weight being on the front wheel (no doubt the "power tank" contributes to this distribution.)

Measured top speed is 99 mph (electronically limited). The bike ran the 1/4 mile in 12.82 seconds at 98.94 mph (performance would have been better if the bike could have gone faster). 0-60 mph took 4.58 seconds.  Keep in mind that this was with a 240 (!) test rider and the additional weight of the "power tank".

Maximum range, ridden normally, was about 100 miles, with 120 miles possible if you were careful.  They said that the controller started to back off on the performance when the pack hit around 10% to 15%.  They ran the bike down to 0% and it came to a complete stop at 101.6 miles.  Ridden as hard as possible (like at a racetrack, I assume) range is estimated to be at least 60 miles.

They mentioned that the price of the battery pack is $7,499.99.  I have no idea where that information came from and I don't know if that included the cost of the power tank.  My guess is that it doesn't.

Other than the hard seat, they liked the Zero's compact size, good riding position, dense packaging and decent legroom.

Motor rpm at an actual 65 mph is 3950.  When the speedometer reads 65 mph, the actual speed is 62.9 mph.

In the same issue, the BMW S1000R is tested and the "Standard Maintenance" cost for that bike is given as $948 (taking 9.1 hours), whereas the Zero typical maintenance cost (adjusting the final drive and removing and replacing the rear wheel) is only $60 (0.75 hours of labor).

Their "picks" are: 
Awesome, High-torque motor with pitch-perfect control
Compact and agile chassis with quality fit-and-finish
A real 100 miles worth of range

Their "pans" are:
...but, when it does run "dry", recharge times are very long
For $20,000, we deserve better brakes and suspension
Seat might stop the ride before the battery does






 

[trekguy]

Thanks for posting.  I will pick up an issue.

I weigh 162. I wonder what that means in quarter mile and 0-60 times?
 And how does Zero come up with 3.3? That is a big discrepency.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

Rider mass and the power tank make a big difference on such a small machine. It's not like a car where those masses would be negligible.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

Brakes and suspension are definitely weak points for Zero. I'd pay for replacements or to upgrade to a bike that is safer.

[evtricity]

The SR's suspension can be improved with new springs front and rear as well as a revalve to improve the underdamped suspension.

The rear brake's performance doesn't really matter - when do you really use it when you've got such strong regen available. The single front disk is not bad (much better than the FX undersized front rotor) although twin disks would be better for a 180kg bike. Alas, the bikes are expensive already so they've tried to save money on everything but the batteries, controller and motor.

Interesting that Mission, Lightning etc took the opposite approach of using top of the line components - Ohlins, Brembo etc. Maybe Zero could have gone with some of the shocks and brakes used by the Japanese bikes without a large price increase.

The comment on overheating shows a significant impediment for using the SR for spirited riding. It seems that air cooling just doesn't cut it for track days even with the SR motor's high temp magnets. It doesn't help that the battery, charger and lower grill prevent any air from flowing to the battery. Brammo are on the right track with a liquid cooled motor. Moving the charger elsewhere on the bike - preferably a removable charger that goes where the powertank goes (like the Brammo) would give multiple benefits if done right including lowering the battery weight further on the chassis and/or providing better airflow to the motor and faster charge times - 1300W from a 7.6kg charger isn't very good - the Elcon does 2500W for less weight!

[ultrarnr]

I think a big part of the comments on overheating are related to a sensor problem. My gararge this morning was 75 degrees. My SR, which hasn't been ridden since about 9pm last night showed a motor temp of 93 degrees! Controller temp of 78 degrees and battery temp of 87 degrees. I have ran my SR at 80MPH for up to 30 miles and while the temp light has been on for about half that distance the power level was never reduced. Right now the motor temp is 18 degrees above ambient so perhaps the sensor that does cut power due to overheating does get an accurate temperature reading. There have been a lot of reviews that bring up overheating but I wonder if the motor really gets as hot as the gauge shows.

Perhaps Zero needs to consider offering Olins and Brembos as options for the S and SR. Yes I agree the back brake sucks. But go test ride a Ducati 1200 Multistrada. The back brake on that bike sucks REALLY bad to and it is a Brembo. The Ducati forums are full of things people have tried to get a functional bake brake on their Multistrada. I feel the front brake is good. Yes I would like to see dual disks in front but I have no complaints about the stopping power of the front brake.

There are a lot of motorcycles that are built to a price point. There is no doubt Zero could include top of the line components like Mission and Lightening but to think that can be done without matching the price of those bikes is a bit unrealistic. It would be very easy to have a SR costing close to 30K. If you want a SR and have 5K extra would you want to spend it on better brakes, better suspension, bigger battery or faster charging?

[Richard230]

Thanks for posting.  I will pick up an issue.

I weigh 162. I wonder what that means in quarter mile and 0-60 times?
 And how does Zero come up with 3.3? That is a big discrepency.

My guess is that Zero was able to get a 3.3 second 0-60 time using an SR with an 8.5 kWh battery and a 140-pound rider.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

The rear brake's performance doesn't really matter - when do you really use it when you've got such strong regen available. The single front disk is not bad (much better than the FX undersized front rotor) although twin disks would be better for a 180kg bike. Alas, the bikes are expensive already so they've tried to save money on everything but the batteries, controller and motor.

In answer to your question: every morning when I enter Seattle's downtown and am looking down a 15% grade from light to light on the grid. I do not want to sail out into traffic or crash into a car that brakes quickly at an intersection!

[evtricity]

ultrarnr - pointed noted above the overheating.

At a recent track day the motor temperature on my SR read over 110C for many minutes, peaking at 118C. This was on a 15C day and slightly damp track (so not pushing the bike hard).

The overheating light comes on at 100C.

I don't think the power was being limited due to overheating although when the charge went below 30%, I was getting reduced power because of that. I have more racing in coming months and as the temperature heats up in Australia with racing on dry tacks I expect the motor to get a fair bit hotter!

Interestingly, battery and motor controller temps remained low so no concerns there.

Must admit, the lack of Zero factory supported riders racing the SR has been odd given the SR pics and race track promos. If the bike was designed to handle the track as the promos portray I would have thought we'd see the bikes being raced like Brammo does with factory support.

[Falco]

The way the power limiting on the SR works from expirence is this: @ 100C the thermal warning light comes on blinking. This is just a warning. @ 110C the bike enters power limiting where it starts cutting the power from the controller for every degree over 110C. I have had my bike up to 128C in very spirited riding at at this temp the bike is very gutless. I have not got to the final temp cutout. Does anyone know what temp this happens at?
Its pretty frustrating but the motor cools down relatively quickly and once below 110C you have full power again.

[protomech]

Thanks for posting.  I will pick up an issue.

I weigh 162. I wonder what that means in quarter mile and 0-60 times?
 And how does Zero come up with 3.3? That is a big discrepency.

My guess is that Zero was able to get a 3.3 second 0-60 time using an SR with an 8.5 kWh battery and a 140-pound rider.

Possibly. There's definitely some oddity with Zero's performance claims.

First, on the same bike assuming linear improvements due to weight and ignoring traction issues, yields:

ZF11.4 (~3.3 seconds / 4.56 seconds) * (240 pound rider + 452 pound bike) = ~501 pounds total (407 lb bike, ~100 lb rider)
ZF14.2 (~3.9 seconds / 4.56 seconds) * (240 pound rider + 452 pound bike) = ~592 pounds total (452 lb bike, ~140 lb rider)

With the same 140 pound rider, a ZF14.2 should be around 3.9 seconds, a ZF11.4 should be around 3.6 seconds, and a hypothetical ZF8.5 should be around 3.3 seconds. Zero does specifically claim the 3.3 seconds for the ZF11.4 bike, which indicates that a different rider was used.

None of this is to say that Zero's acceleration claims are impossible or a lie, but the ZF11.4 claim in particular requires a young child rider or a very light female, and is unrepresentative of the performance that the majority of adult US male riders would experience.

[Doug S]

Early on, I was wondering how quick my bike would be with me on it, and I looked up and found a drag-racing calculator online. You input your vehicle's weight and power characteristics and it'll give you an estimate of 1/4-mile and 0-60 times. The characteristics of the SR (no power tank) with a light rider (somewhere around 140 pounds IIRC) did give me an estimated 0-60 time of 3.3 seconds. With me on it.....well let's just say it's a little slower, but I certainly can't blame Zero for that!