Print

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

[Richard230]

You can say anything you want about lack of maintenance, efficiency, etc. etc.  But all the typical vehicle owner in the U.S. cares about is the cost of gas and its easy availability.  I went through the "gas crisis" during the 1970's and you should have seen the panic in the streets from people trying to buy gas. If electric vehicles were being sold at that time, no company could make them fast enough to satisfy demand.  Even mopeds and scooters were selling to auto owners (who had no idea how to ride) like hotcakes. That was the first time I ever saw Consumer Reports do an evaluation of motorcycles and scooters in their magazine (I think they tested one of the Honda automatic transmission models).  Of course once gas became available again, all of those scooters and mopeds headed into the back yard to start their future careers as piles of rust.   

[frodus]

You can say anything you want about lack of maintenance, efficiency, etc. etc.  But all the typical vehicle owner in the U.S. cares about is the cost of gas and its easy availability.

That's an interesting statement (and I do agree at least in my case), but almost all of the complaints between the Brammo and Zero seem to boil down to the Brammo being perceived as more maintenance and less efficient. When it comes to owning the bike, I mostly care about how cheap it is to drive. Efficiency loss for transmission is negligible and can be offset by changing to a different gear (one to put the motor in a more efficient RPM), and maintenance is a quick drain and refill of 1 quart of oil once every few thousand miles, which is no biggy for me.

I guess I'm a typical rider, and neither of those items matter at all to me, just the cost and ease of driving.

[Doug S]

Here it does make sense to buy electric, price is 0.08 CAD$ per kWh.

To my way of thinking, that's just one piece of the puzzle, and not a very big one. Even here in San Diego, where I'm paying 0.174 per kWh, "fuel" costs just don't amount to much. I pointed out earlier that I'm paying more for electricity than I'd pay for the energy equivalent of gasoline, but there's no ICE vehicle that can get 230 MPGe on the freeway, 460 on city streets, so my fuel costs are very low -- so low, in fact that I'm paying more for tires (just about to get my second new rear tire fitted at 17,200 miles) than I'm paying for electricity. Fuel costs are totally down in the mud. Even lower fuel costs wouldn't reduce my total cost of riding noticeably.

[Burton]

Here it does make sense to buy electric, price is 0.08 CAD$ per kWh.

Your savings isn't in fuel, if it is I feel for you. 99% of your savings over any ICE bike will be maintenance costs; even if you do all the work yourself. If you are honest with yourself and value your time you will find the bike will pay for itself after 4 or 5 years if you ride 50 miles 5 days a week to work over an ICE bike.

How many people thought last year "I am going to buy this bike because it is going to save me on gas," instead of "I am going to be this bike because it speaks to me and is fun to ride?" An electric bike will do both and it will spoil you so much you will be wondering why you didn't switch earlier.

I use to "poo poo" electrics till I took an objective look at them and made my own cost analysis spreadsheet and the "return" I got back from getting the electric goes way beyond what my spreadsheet said it would be. How many ICE bikes do you get on and grin each time you ride because it is so fun to ride you can't help it?

[KrazyEd]

A Few years ago when the Lightning was at Laguna Seca, I asked them about a transmission.
He said that he could roll the throttle at 150 mph and bring up the front wheel. Why would
he want one.

[frodus]

A Few years ago when the Lightning was at Laguna Seca, I asked them about a transmission.
He said that he could roll the throttle at 150 mph and bring up the front wheel. Why would
he want one.

He wouldn't, for 1 reason: They have a Remy HVH 250 motor, a high power Rinehart controller and high power battery.

Its the same reason Brammo has a fixed ratio on their race bike, the motor and battery pack are powerful enough.

If you had a gas engine, such that it could go from 0-150mph in one gear (of course you'd still retain a clutch) and remain in its power band most of the time, you wouldn't think it'd need a transmission either. My buddy's R1 can do 90 in first. Does he need a transmission? With your reasoning, maybe he doesn't. So why does it need one?

I recall that the reason that Brammo chose the Transmission is so they could gain some performance (with the same motor) by adding a transmission because you can put the motor into its power band whenever you want. Motors have an HP curve, so on either end your HP falls off. With a transmission, you can peak your HP in every gear. You could be fast off the line, and also get to 110MPH quickly. With one ratio, you could gear for 110, but have slower acceleration at low speeds. As another benefit, you can help offset the loss in efficiency due to transmission by changing gears so you stay in the "happy place". With one ratio, you're stuck with lower efficiency at RPM's outside of the efficiency curve of the motor being used.

I'd be fine with or without a transmission. I would appreciate the simplicity I'm sure, but I do also enjoy the transmission performance/efficiency benefits above. I do like to keep at 4K RPM at my cruising speeds, whether its 25, 45 or 60mph, to try and get the highest efficiency out of it. I did an unofficial test once. After a full charge, I ran the bike until about 95% SOC. In one test, I stuck in 3rd gear and ran the bike. Then I ran for 5 miles along the same route, trying to keep my acceleration similar. I didn't gun it, got to speed with traffic, cruised at the speed limit, etc. Then I did the same, but used 2 through 5 gears like normal. I was able to have 1-2% higher SOC when I returned home over the previous test. Again, not official, and not that much, but its there. But again, I'd be fine with or without. It doesn't really matter a huge amount to me.

For me:
I think the Zero is pretty ugly
I think the quality of the parts have been below what riders expected
I find the number of glitches in the BMS/VCU/Controller to be bothersome
I wanted L2 charging, without having to buy more stuff

I basically had my choice between both of them at a very similar cost (My Brammo was a Press bike), and went with the one that I felt was higher quality, better looking and came with a better charger. If the Zero had those, I'd have gone with a Zero, but it didn't. Transmission never came into my mind when justifying one over the other.

[Richard230]

The perfect IC motorcycle for using direct drive is the Boss Hog.    That bike's motor will get the job done.     But would you want to own one?   

[Ranga]

A Few years ago when the Lightning was at Laguna Seca, I asked them about a transmission.
He said that he could roll the throttle at 150 mph and bring up the front wheel. Why would
he want one.

He wouldn't, for 1 reason: They have a Remy HVH 250 motor, a high power Rinehart controller and high power battery.

Its the same reason Brammo has a fixed ratio on their race bike, the motor and battery pack are powerful enough.

If you had a gas engine, such that it could go from 0-150mph in one gear (of course you'd still retain a clutch) and remain in its power band most of the time, you wouldn't think it'd need a transmission either. My buddy's R1 can do 90 in first. Does he need a transmission? With your reasoning, maybe he doesn't. So why does it need one?

I recall that the reason that Brammo chose the Transmission is so they could gain some performance (with the same motor) by adding a transmission because you can put the motor into its power band whenever you want. Motors have an HP curve, so on either end your HP falls off. With a transmission, you can peak your HP in every gear. You could be fast off the line, and also get to 110MPH quickly. With one ratio, you could gear for 110, but have slower acceleration at low speeds. As another benefit, you can help offset the loss in efficiency due to transmission by changing gears so you stay in the "happy place". With one ratio, you're stuck with lower efficiency at RPM's outside of the efficiency curve of the motor being used.

I'd be fine with or without a transmission. I would appreciate the simplicity I'm sure, but I do also enjoy the transmission performance/efficiency benefits above.

Frodos, this isn't anything personal against you, more of an expression of chronic annoyance with the people who believe Brammo's marketing bullsh argue for the merits of the transmission.  Those who believe that a 6 speed transmission is necessary for optimal acceleration and top speed have had their heads buried in the sand since 2013, and are ignorant of the existence of the Zero SR.

I don't believe Brammo has ever published 0-60 times, but cycleworld found the 2013 Empulse R to accomplish it in 4.8 seconds. http://www.cycleworld.com/2013/10/31/brammo-empulse-r-vs-zero-s-electric-motorcycles-comparison-test-specs-photos/ The SR has a claimed acceleration of 3.3 seconds, and has been confirmed by customers to be well under 4.  Considering the minimalist nature of the changes Brammo made over the years, its hard to believe they ever got it down that far, but for the sake of this comparison, we'll assume off-the-line acceleration is comparable. This, plus the fact that their advertised top speeds are nearly identical cresting 100mph, means the SR is living proof that the transmission is dead weight.

The problem for Brammo was that they started out with relatively weak batteries and a weak motor (as did Zero back then). Under these conditions, it is true that they would have had to decide between top speed and acceleration with the gearing. But instead of addressing the problem, Brammo's engineering and management decided to mask the symptoms.  First they tried to develop a 2 speed transmission as Tesla originally tried. Failing that, they implemented a standardized ICE transmission; a mistake no other electric vehicle manufacturer has made.

Had they addressed the problem and dedicated their engineering efforts to gradually improving battery performance or designing a motor of their own as Zero did, the Empulse would have been launched on time and much closer to the originally advertised price. They might even be still making their own bikes today. The fact they have dedicated their marketing to promote misinformation about electric motors and use talkingpoints like "it keeps it in the sweet spot" turns this mistake into denial and feeds lies to people looking for honest information.

I am confused as to why this conversation is still ongoing. We can theorize from our armchairs all we want, but one test is worth a thousand expert opinions. The experiment has been performed and the results are conclusive.  The SR has identical if not better acceleration and top speed, has more range and all for less money.  I believe Zero's ABS matches Brammo's duel front rotors enough for the average customer. The only drawback is that the SR's footpegs prevent it from cornering as well meaning it will never be as competitive on a race course, but this has no bearing in a conversation about powertrains.  This is a tired argument, and it needs to end.

[Chocula]

A few months back I wrote:

I test rode the 2014 Zero S and the 2014 Brammo Empluse R back to back.  My preference for the Brammo was in large part the suspension, brakes, on board charger, and the transmission.  I found the riding experience to be more enjoyable on the Brammo, though the performance, lower sound level, and lower maintenance of the 2015 Zero SR had some appeal.  Others will have different priorities and many will choose different bikes.

This is still true, I have no regrets having chosen the Empluse R and I would not trade it for a new 2015 Zero SR if given the option.

[Ranga]

A few months back I wrote:

I test rode the 2014 Zero S and the 2014 Brammo Empluse R back to back.  My preference for the Brammo was in large part the suspension, brakes, on board charger, and the transmission.  I found the riding experience to be more enjoyable on the Brammo, though the performance, lower sound level, and lower maintenance of the 2015 Zero SR had some appeal.  Others will have different priorities and many will choose different bikes.

This is still true, I have no regrets having chosen the Empluse R and I would not trade it for a new 2015 Zero SR if given the option.

If your argument for getting a Brammo is that it corners better, has L2 charging or had better suspension before '15, I'll give that to you.  If you bought it during the firesale when it was cheaper, it was a risky decision but I'll give it to you.  And if your argument for the transmission is that you enjoy running through the gears, I can't argue with your personal preference. My plight is with those that claim the transmission makes it faster or more efficient than a single speed bike with the same size 6 controller and similar price, because it doesn't. (also, I'm assuming you test rode a '14 SR, because comparing an Empulse R to a S based on personal feel seems foolish to me.)

[frodus]

From my experience and in talking to other riders and racers.... the bikes are all in all about the same for acceleration and speed, as proven by very close race times over the past several years. Is it needed? No. Zero and brammo chose different paths to achieve the same result. Zero chose a larger higher torque motor with the same horsepower. Brammo chose a smaller water cooled motor with the same horsepower and a transmission.

Does it matter? Not to me.

The low quality of the zero overall and the ugliness swayed me more than anything. Range wasn't a choice when I bought mine, the SR and power pack weren't available to me in the beginning of 2013.

Transmission didn't matter, still doesn't matter and I agree, people should stop bitching about it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[Cortezdtv]

To me a tranny shouldn't be used; you would be better off with a "overdrive" unit that you toggle on like the zombie222 car.... Honestly best tranny idea for a electric vehicle yet.....


This year at refuel.    Zero and brammo were pretty even

In fact zeros had thermal issues running flat out with the short gearing; where as the brammos also ran into issues, one had issues (I can't recall what) and the other blew a tranny.... So they both have their flaws

Pick your poisen

[Richard230]

I spoke to a Zero engineer about the time that Brammo announced that the Empulse would have a transmission and asked him why Zero didn't go in that direction.  He told me that the main reason was expense, followed by the components taking up space that could be used for additional batteries and therefore range.  He felt that the market (at the time that the decision was made) was looking for a lower price and greater range.  I gather that the then recent story of Tesla's transmission failure may also have helped solidify their decision to go with direct drive.

[CrashCash]

Transmission didn't matter, still doesn't matter and I agree, people should stop bitching about it.

The transmission matters to me because shifting sucks. After the test rides on both makes, the main factor that drove me away from the Brammo was the transmission.

[Doug S]

When I first started looking at electric bikes, I was drawn to the Brammo. It was water-cooled, it had a transmission and a clutch, it just seemed like a more thoroughly engineered solution (and yes, I'm an Engineer). But then I realized that the Zero is lighter, has less maintenance (no oil changes or coolant flushes), it can't leak (except for brake fluid or shock absorber fluid), and has a lot fewer parts to fail.

On the rare occasion the motor on my bike heats up, I wish I had the water-cooling, but other than that I think I made the right choice, at least for me. Simpler sometimes really is better.