Print

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

[grmarks]

mrwilsn because you saw a ZF13 battery for 2017 does not necessarily mean they won't introduce a bigger (more expensive) new battery. That would give buyers the option to stay with the ZF13 and its price or shell out more money for a bigger capacity battery and more range.
Last year the old motor was around also in the FX and smaller battery bikes along with the new IPM motor.

The option is there for a bigger capacity battery with the 32ah cells.

[mrwilsn]

mrwilsn because you saw a ZF13 battery for 2017 does not necessarily mean they won't introduce a bigger (more expensive) new battery. That would give buyers the option to stay with the ZF13 and its price or shell out more money for a bigger capacity battery and more range.
Last year the old motor was around also in the FX and smaller battery bikes along with the new IPM motor.

The option is there for a bigger capacity battery with the 32ah cells.

That's true.  Although it would be a departure from the options Zero has offered in the past.

Zero has always only offered one battery option for the SR and DSR.  For the FX/FXS the options have always been one brick or two and for the S/DS the options have been 3 bricks or 4.  I'm not counting adding a power tank here.  They have never offered the same model with two different monolith options using the same number of bricks.  The 6.5 or 13 options follow in line with the same methodology of just using the same cells and providing options based on the number of bricks in parallel.

The cost of the battery is a large percentage of the cost of the bike but the difference in cost of the 32 Ah cells vs. the 29 Ah cells is negligible.  If they offered an SR ZF13 (4 bricks using 29 Ah cells) and an SR ZF14.8 (4 bricks using 32 Ah cells) I doubt they could separate them enough in price that anyone would go for the ZF13.

It seems unlikely to me but your idea can't be counted out until 8 November.

[Electric Terry]

Well I wouldn't quite say 13+ bikes are "obsolete" just not as attractive as 15/16's.  The issue for me is Zero making a 9.8 DS cuts into the market that would be looking at my 11.4 13MY DS. 
Making maybe $9,000 the TOP amount you could hope to get for one.  If everyone could only buy a new $13,000 13ZF DS mine might bring $10,500 or $11,000 which would make it much more likely that I would cough up the extra $3000 for the latest and greatest because I know how good they are.
If Zero dealers would give you $8000 on trade in and then could turn around and sell them at $10500 that would be a great no hassle deal for early adopters and they could "certify" the older bikes and give maybe a 6 month or year warranty.  At some point this will need to happen just like in the car market.

NEW2elec, have you scheduled with your dealer to bring your bike in for a battery replacement?  The 2013 cells had a potting material that was found over time could react with the pouch cell itself, and this was fixed in 2014.  But since there weren't any 2014 11.4's left at this time, 2013 owners got a little boost for being an early adopter and will be getting a ZF12.5 monolith.  As soon as that happens, this should increase the range of your bike a little and hopefully give you the price difference you need so you can upgrade to a new Zero.  You've put in your time, let someone else get your 2013, fall in love with electric, and then after a year or two upgrade as well and the cycle continues. 

[NEW2elec]

Thanks Terry but as far as I know mine was the first bike to have this issue.
They seemed to have at least one 14 monolith left since that was what they replaced it with.
My dealer thought I needed a new BMS but it was more than that so off it went.
I talked to a guy at Zero who I won't name and asked if they would put a 12.5 in and he told me they wouldn't work in a 13.
I may have the only 11.4 DS 13MY left in the world (so its priceless)

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

I think the 6.5 is upgradable to the 13, and that that's the missing factor that makes this work.

On one of the Zero web casts they stated that the "new" frame format (from 2012 or 2013 onwards) would stay the same so that a battery upgrade was possible. Old bikes could put in a new battery. So this would mean the 6.5 is upgradeable too. But it may mean taking out the old 6.5 monolith and putting in a new 9.8 or 13 monolith, not just adding 6.5 to what you have.

I think it literally means two 6.5s, and that the 13 models will have two 6.5s, and that there will be no more monoliths.

There's too much cost in taking out an old monolith (who would buy the cells?), and the fact that Zero never upgrades a customer from a 3p bike to 4p says as much. I think what this means is abandoning the monolith design in favor of a more pluggable design.

What I'm really hopeful for is that the up-to-now monolith based bikes will now be able to have cooperating BMS boards, which has so far been unreliable with the Power Tank installs. This speaks more to Terry's touring goals.

[grmarks]

I think the 6.5 is upgradable to the 13, and that that's the missing factor that makes this work.

On one of the Zero web casts they stated that the "new" frame format (from 2012 or 2013 onwards) would stay the same so that a battery upgrade was possible. Old bikes could put in a new battery. So this would mean the 6.5 is upgradeable too. But it may mean taking out the old 6.5 monolith and putting in a new 9.8 or 13 monolith, not just adding 6.5 to what you have.

I think it literally means two 6.5s, and that the 13 models will have two 6.5s, and that there will be no more monoliths.

There's too much cost in taking out an old monolith (who would buy the cells?), and the fact that Zero never upgrades a customer from a 3p bike to 4p says as much. I think what this means is abandoning the monolith design in favor of a more pluggable design.

What I'm really hopeful for is that the up-to-now monolith based bikes will now be able to have cooperating BMS boards, which has so far been unreliable with the Power Tank installs. This speaks more to Terry's touring goals.

We are guessing, and its a chance, but what if the 6.5 is a flop (don't sell any). With a monolith, if cells get thinner you could squeeze 5 bricks in it with no change to external cables coming out. If you introduce 2 6.5's and then try to put 2 1/2 cells in each you would need an extra cable to join the 2 1/2 cells together.
The monolith gives a lot more flexibility going forward to accomodate different configurations within.

You could even make a 6.5 monolith using cheaper (larger) cells that fill the monolith and really reduce the price of the bike.

I think it would be a really backwards move to go with 2 X 6.5 "mini-liths" rather than 1 monolith.
Also every external connector is a potential failure point.

[mrwilsn]

We are guessing, and its a chance, but what if the 6.5 is a flop (don't sell any). With a monolith, if cells get thinner you could squeeze 5 bricks in it with no change to external cables coming out. If you introduce 2 6.5's and then try to put 2 1/2 cells in each you would need an extra cable to join the 2 1/2 cells together.
The monolith gives a lot more flexibility going forward to accomodate different configurations within.

You could even make a 6.5 monolith using cheaper (larger) cells that fill the monolith and really reduce the price of the bike.

I think it would be a really backwards move to go with 2 X 6.5 "mini-liths" rather than 1 monolith.
Also every external connector is a potential failure point.

I think you may have a slight misunderstanding of the design of the Zero battery.  A monolith is not just a 28S4P pack of cells.

Zero currently has a "brick" architecture.  Each brick contains 28 cells wired in series (28S1P) and each brick has it's own housing, BMS, contactors and connectors.  The bricks that are inside a monolith are identical to the bricks that are used on the FX/S.  So a 2016 Zero SR ZF13 has a monolith that has 4 bricks inside.  Making a single ZF6.5 brick (28S2P) would mean cutting the extra bulk of BMS, contactors, connectors etc. in half.

It's more likely that the cells will stay the same size but increase in capacity (as they have in the past....25Ah, 27Ah, 29Ah and 32Ah) than having the cells themselves shrink in size.

[grmarks]

I think you may have a slight misunderstanding of the design of the Zero battery.  A monolith is not just a 28S4P pack of cells.

Zero currently has a "brick" architecture.  Each brick contains 28 cells wired in series (28S1P) and each brick has it's own housing, BMS, contactors and connectors.  The bricks that are inside a monolith are identical to the bricks that are used on the FX/S.  So a 2016 Zero SR ZF13 has a monolith that has 4 bricks inside.  Making a single ZF6.5 brick (28S2P) would mean cutting the extra bulk of BMS, contactors, connectors etc. in half.

It's more likely that the cells will stay the same size but increase in capacity (as they have in the past....25Ah, 27Ah, 29Ah and 32Ah) than having the cells themselves shrink in size.

I am aware that they use a brick architecture.
So are you saying that there are 4 contactors in a monolith and 5 housings (1 per brick and the monolith housing)?

I would have thought that the bricks were naked and hard wired together inside a monolith, that would reduce weight and increase reliability.

If a new cell comes out that is thinner and you could fit 5 bricks inside a monolith (by splitting 1 brick in 1/2) then why wouldn't you (change the design). Its a monolith, no need to know whats inside as long as it has the same connectors coming out. It may raise the cost a bit (for 2 1/2 bricks) but for extra range could be worth it.

I guess we will all be eager to see what Zero has done. Last year some were disappointed, I personally thought the FXS and DSR were a great move and was blown away by the IPM motor, that was a big ticket item.   

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

Easy rejoinder to grmarks' valid but not realistic concept: whatever incurs the lowest R&D costs will certainly win in the short term, and Zero needs to maximize ROI. So, changing the physical dimensions is usually going to lose on a motorcycle design.

Look, lest anyone think I'm speculating too broadly, I saw the frame with my own eyes, and I believe it's set up for what I mentioned, though no one would comment. It's an interesting approach and will probably push Zero higher on the adoption curve without them having spent too much time on it.

There were other things they wouldn't comment on that I hope we'll see in concert with that.

[mrwilsn]

I am aware that they use a brick architecture.
So are you saying that there are 4 contactors in a monolith and 5 housings (1 per brick and the monolith housing)?

I would have thought that the bricks were naked and hard wired together inside a monolith, that would reduce weight and increase reliability.

If a new cell comes out that is thinner and you could fit 5 bricks inside a monolith (by splitting 1 brick in 1/2) then why wouldn't you (change the design). Its a monolith, no need to know whats inside as long as it has the same connectors coming out. It may raise the cost a bit (for 2 1/2 bricks) but for extra range could be worth it.

I guess we will all be eager to see what Zero has done. Last year some were disappointed, I personally thought the FXS and DSR were a great move and was blown away by the IPM motor, that was a big ticket item.

You got it....its kind of amazing really.  Zero has the most energy dense battery pack available on the EV market and they still have room to optimize the design.

The cells are only 6mm thick as it is (or at least I assume they are....I have only been able to find a spec for the old 25 Ah cells).  There isn't much room to make them thinner....not to mention that making the cells thinner would just increase the overall packaging of the battery pack.

Keep in mind that a battery is very different from microelectronics.  The goal isn't to keep making the battery smaller and smaller.  The goal is to take a battery of the exact same size and fit more energy inside.  Think about it....how long have AA batteries been around....AAA....9 volt.....C....D....18650....etc  The form factor gets standardized and then they just try to squeeze more energy into the package.  They have to do this because of economies of scale and because once an OEM has decided on a form factor they don't want to change the product design because the size of the battery changed.  From the point of view of a company like Farasis imagine trying to convince Zero to buy some new smaller cells which would require redesign work by Zero vs. trying to sell them some new cells that are drop in replacements for the cells they already use but they have more energy in them (e.g. moving to 32 Ah instead of 29 Ah).

No matter what, I think some people will be disappointed.  Even if they upgraded to the 32 Ah cells some people would be disappointed that its not more.

[MostlyBonkers]

My local dealer had a 2015 DS that was prepped and ready for sale today, so they're still getting shot of stock from two years ago. I'll bet there are still a few 2014's in a warehouse somewhere too.

I'd like to see more folks enjoying the experience of owning a Zero, so if the 2017 model year brings nothing more than price cuts, I think that is a big win.  From what I can tell, reliability is there now and it has been good for me with a 2014 model, all things considered.

[Kocho]

$9K for a '13 DS, even with the '14 or '15/'16 battery I think is highly optimistic. Heck, if someone wants to buy my perfectly functional low-mileage '15 SR for $10.5K - message me and it's yours when you show-up with the cash!

The situation with resale I think, unfortunately, is somewhat similar with the resale value of electric cars: what was a $30K car (Leaf for instance) sells at auctions for $6K (and not much more at retail) only a couple of years later in perfect condition. Hoping to recoup more than half of the original retail on a used Zero three years later I think is unrealistic.

But yes, having a cheaper and less capable "new" MY'17 will help to sell older but more capable models better. This is how I bought my 12kW '15 SR used (but almost new) at a price that was about the same $$$ as a brand new '16 S with the 9kW battery. Cheap it was not, but I got more for the same money vs. buying new. And I would not have bought a new SR at the still too high prices they are asking for them.

Well I wouldn't quite say 13+ bikes are "obsolete" just not as attractive as 15/16's.  The issue for me is Zero making a 9.8 DS cuts into the market that would be looking at my 11.4 13MY DS. 
Making maybe $9,000 the TOP amount you could hope to get for one.  If everyone could only buy a new $13,000 13ZF DS mine might bring $10,500 or $11,000 which would make it much more likely that I would cough up the extra $3000 for the latest and greatest because I know how good they are.
If Zero dealers would give you $8000 on trade in and then could turn around and sell them at $10500 that would be a great no hassle deal for early adopters and they could "certify" the older bikes and give maybe a 6 month or year warranty.  At some point this will need to happen just like in the car market.

[ZeroPointZero]

Leaked photo of 2017 ZeroSR Cruiser... 

[guppie70]

Yeah!
I think that would be a low-tech way of increasing milage and comfort. Upgrade the suspension as well (decent breaks) and I might just consider buying it...

[vinceherman]

and I might just consider buying it...

And cruise control!!!