Print

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

[David S]

As always the weight of the rider is a big factor. The specs don't lie, but do you weigh 70kg? The specs on the spread sheet are more inline with us heavier guys.

Yeah the specs did lie (0-60 times)! Exept for a calculation without driver, then it would be possible
Check out this thread http://electricmotorcycleforum.com/boards/index.php?topic=5877.msg43611#msg43611
I haven't seen a anyone getting measured times under 4s with a stock SR < 2017. At 0-60 in 4.25s I was at max 85kg inkl. riding Gear&Helmet, thats 6% heavier overall weight that with a 70kg rider. You can make the calculation for yourself

I think they took the 0-60 times away because they fucked up the old calculation and never actually measured it. And they cant put the same or a slower number for a stronger and shorter geared bike in, because this would show the mistake (although it would be the right thing todo).

Dont get me wrong, i love my SR. But i have a ICE-Bike for comparison that is also ratet arround 3.3s 0-100 and its a damn lot faster at a drag race. Not in everyday use though Electric torque is just the thing to have

So the new gearing is better for 0-60 times?

[grmarks]

As always the weight of the rider is a big factor. The specs don't lie, but do you weigh 70kg? The specs on the spread sheet are more inline with us heavier guys.

Yeah the specs did lie (0-60 times)! Exept for a calculation without driver, then it would be possible
Check out this thread http://electricmotorcycleforum.com/boards/index.php?topic=5877.msg43611#msg43611
I haven't seen a anyone getting measured times under 4s with a stock SR < 2017. At 0-60 in 4.25s I was at max 85kg inkl. riding Gear&Helmet, thats 6% heavier overall weight that with a 70kg rider. You can make the calculation for yourself

I think they took the 0-60 times away because they fucked up the old calculation and never actually measured it. And they cant put the same or a slower number for a stronger and shorter geared bike in, because this would show the mistake (although it would be the right thing todo).

Dont get me wrong, i love my SR. But i have a ICE-Bike for comparison that is also ratet arround 3.3s 0-100 and its a damn lot faster at a drag race. Not in everyday use though Electric torque is just the thing to have

So the new gearing is better for 0-60 times?

It must be as there is more torque at the back wheel for 2017 SR.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

It would really make a lot of sense if those 6.5 bikes could be upgraded later to 13 by replacing the storage area with another "long brick". That way someone who enters the market with a low range commute and then has a change of plans can just adapt. I'm certainly scratching my head at the lack of an upgrade to balance out the weird tradeoff here.

This is more difficult than replacing a three-brick monolith with a four-brick monolith. In addition to removing the storage component and replacing the long-brick monolith with a four-brick monolith, ...

This is not what I was suggesting. I thought that the long brick fit in the same space as the storage component, and that the bike achieved a 13 rating with two long bricks physically adjacent (yes, by removing the storage bin but probably also by removing the dividing bracket). I'm disappointed to admit that they do not seem to have achieved that.

What I'm genuinely unsure about is how the BMS relates to these changes. Each brick on an FX and each power tank has its own BMS. One monolith has a BMS. The new FX power source is a long brick - which contains a BMS, I would think? The new monoliths presumably are constructed internally with long brick construction just to simplify or consolidate parts. But does a monolith still have one BMS, then? A BMS takes up space, and it's notable that the front plate arrangement on new Zero's is a little different for unclear reasons.


This doesn't clarify to me why the ZF3.3 Power Tank is not backwards-compatible with older bikes, though, and I'm interested in this because I want to know whether various mystery issues with power tanks have been solved.

[benswing]

More news on the 2017 lineup:  http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1107457_2017-zero-electric-motorcycles-more-range-more-power-better-options


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[idle]

Anyone know if '17 bodies can be retrofitted to '16 models? In particular I'm eyeballing the new lockable storage @ '17 DSR.

[JaimeC]

I'm pretty sure the answer is "Yes" but you might be better off asking that question of Zero itself through their "Contact Us" link on their website to be sure.

You'd have to replace the entire tank, and I'm not aware of any structural differences between the 2016 and 2017 bikes that would prevent that swap.  However, since you'd have to replace the entire assembly, it may be cheaper to simply get the Carbon Fiber cover sold by Hollywood Electrics instead.  It was so easy to install, even *I* could do it.

Final consideration:  The 2016 and earlier bikes had molded-in color plastics whereas the 2017 bikes now have painted plastics.  The color match MAY look a little "different."

[wavelet]

The updated battery warranty is very nice, and the improved torque is nice too...
I also suspect that the switch from 3-brick to 2-brick is because not too many people bought the 3-brick models...

I further suspect that even less people will buy the 2-brickers. Noone buys a motorcycle to ride at city speeds with no acceleration -- an e-scooter or e-bicycle do a better job there. The S/DS ZF6.5 has 40-50mi realistic range the way motorcycles are usually ridden. That's is OK for many commutes, but not any kind of road trip.
 
I think that as  Tesla (and all other  BEV carmaker) eventually decided, it's enough to offer two battery sizes. At Zero's smaller volumes, I doubt there's justification for three. I expect Zero to follow suit, and within a year or two offer just the 4-brick (ZF13) and the PowerTank versions.

That aside, I'm mostly disappointed by the lineup.

IMO, at least for the way road bikes and dual-sports are ridden, Zero's  #1, #2 and #3 glaring problems are range, range and range.

A compromise aerodynamic fairing (aesthetically more acceptable than Terry's record-breakers) that gives a 30% improvement in high-speed range should be possible technically, but probably requires resources Zero don't have in house. So I was just a little bit disappointed when it didn't show up a year ago.

But I don't think there was a valid reason not to offer better charging options for 2016, and even less not to make any progress for the 2017 models. Zero should have all the expertise in house to make it happen.
1.3kW on AC is completely ridiculous. 3.3kW should be the minimum, without requiring an extra accessory (ChargeTank), particularly one that removes the PowerTank option; the Energica has this as the onboard charger. More likely 6.6kW/7.2kW should  be supported, which makes local-area destination charging useful (a 1-hour stop at shopping mallis enough to get you home, even if near-empty).

What's really needed, however, for day trips, is a DCFC.
This is how the Energica Ego does it (video from 1.5 years ago): 20kW, so a charge to 80% SoC takes ~30min, and the taper to full another 20min or so (it would be a bit more with current Zeros with their larger batteries, but not by much).

Yes, I know that there have been some compatibility issues with chargers not dealing with Zero's low voltage (relative to an EV's traction battery), but that needs to be addressed -- if no Zero has DCFC, what's the charger vendors' motivation to fix it?

f the HW needed for this on the bike is expensive -- make it an option (I suspect >50% of riders, probably more like 90%, would get it), but most importantly, range is the biggest obstacle to adoption of electric motorcycles among the riders I know.
It's not a bit more torque, which was plenty good already.

Of course, I know about the DigiNow plans --but this should be OEM developed and integrated, or it won't be a mass-adopted item, and it shouldn't take away from luggage space.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

A compromise aerodynamic fairing (aesthetically more acceptable than Terry's record-breakers) that gives a 30% improvement in high-speed range should be possible technically, but probably requires resources Zero don't have in house. So I was just a little bit disappointed when it didn't show up a year ago.

I know they're interested, but they're mum about what might be going on, what they're aiming for, and why it's taking time.

They did make a big emphasis at the 10-year anniversary party about spending a lot of resources this last year clearing regulatory hurdles for more international sales, as a way of explaining and maybe warning not to expect too much from 2017.

But I don't think there was a valid reason not to offer better charging options for 2016, and even less not to make any progress for the 2017 models. Zero should have all the expertise in house to make it happen.
1.3kW on AC is completely ridiculous. 3.3kW should be the minimum, without requiring an extra accessory (ChargeTank), particularly one that removes the PowerTank option; the Energica has this as the onboard charger. More likely 6.6kW/7.2kW should  be supported, which makes local-area destination charging useful (a 1-hour stop at shopping mallis enough to get you home, even if near-empty).

There's definitely room for an onboard charger in the existing space to at least take in 220V at the same amperage yielding more like 2.5kW like the Elcon 2500. I think what's limiting right now is the number of companies working on this problem that don't have compactness and vehicle-rating on their design constraints - Zero piggybacks off of the suppliers for electric forklifts and light industrial trucks, which is great when it works but only progresses because that market is bigger than this one.

And the kicker to all of this is that supplier quality levels can still be really unpredictable. Calex' charger is so conservative but it still has a failure rate that is noticeable to the community! Zero must have a sense that they want those issues shaken out before they start buying from a new supplier.

[wavelet]

A compromise aerodynamic fairing (aesthetically more acceptable than Terry's record-breakers) that gives a 30% improvement in high-speed range should be possible technically, but probably requires resources Zero don't have in house. So I was just a little bit disappointed when it didn't show up a year ago.

I know they're interested, but they're mum about what might be going on, what they're aiming for, and why it's taking time.

They did make a big emphasis at the 10-year anniversary party about spending a lot of resources this last year clearing regulatory hurdles for more international sales, as a way of explaining and maybe warning not to expect too much from 2017.

Interesting.
Although, my sense of an interview or two around the intro of the 2016 models a year ago was "don't expect too much technically, because we're focused on growing sales" -- which did seem to be true; they made progress particularly on fleet sales, IIUC. I'm pretty sure there are virtually no regulatory hurdles for international sales left (no emissions issues...), given they're already selling into several dozen countries, incl. all the significant  markets (realistically, Zeros are too expensive to sell in China, India etc., and only snob-cache non-Japanese motorcycles get sold in Japan).

I don't like hearing the same reason the second year in a row... Esp. given basically no battery improvement.

But I don't think there was a valid reason not to offer better charging options for 2016, and even less not to make any progress for the 2017 models. Zero should have all the expertise in house to make it happen.
1.3kW on AC is completely ridiculous. 3.3kW should be the minimum, without requiring an extra accessory (ChargeTank), particularly one that removes the PowerTank option; the Energica has this as the onboard charger. More likely 6.6kW/7.2kW should  be supported, which makes local-area destination charging useful (a 1-hour stop at shopping mallis enough to get you home, even if near-empty).

There's definitely room for an onboard charger in the existing space to at least take in 220V at the same amperage yielding more like 2.5kW like the Elcon 2500. I think what's limiting right now is the number of companies working on this problem that don't have compactness and vehicle-rating on their design constraints - Zero piggybacks off of the suppliers for electric forklifts and light industrial trucks, which is great when it works but only progresses because that market is bigger than this one.

makes sense. From the pics I've seen, it doesn't look like the Energica has more space available than Zero... Oh, well, we'll have to wait another year to see what transpires.

[ultrarnr]

An internal charger more than 1.3 kW may be great for the European market but don't think it would work well for the US market. Most people in the US just charge their bikes from a 110 volt outlet and a 3.3 kW charger would just blow fuses all of the time. I installed a 220 volt outlet in my garage for charging at home with my Elcons but that is not an option for many people.

When it comes to larger battery packs and longer range I think Zero is coming up against the space available in the frame they are using. Yes new battery tech will help some but it will mean small, incremental gains in battery size. The Brutus V9 can handle a 33.7 kWh battery pack. But the Brutus V9 is a large motorcycle, very close if not equal to a H-D Road King. The wheel base on a V9 is 65 inches compared to 55.5 for a Zero SR. The V9 with a 33.7 kWh battery weighs 886 lbs compared to a SR with Power Tank at 458 lbs. But if Zero designed another motorcycle and it was the size of a Brutus V9 it will also come at a much higher price. The higher price would put the bike out of range for many people. Zero designed a small motorcycle in order to keep the price down and within the budgets of more people. Everything is a compromise.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

I'm pretty sure there are virtually no regulatory hurdles for international sales left (no emissions issues...), given they're already selling into several dozen countries, incl. all the significant  markets (realistically, Zeros are too expensive to sell in China, India etc., and only snob-cache non-Japanese motorcycles get sold in Japan).

The operative word, if I recall correctly, was "electromagnetic". I didn't expect that, either.

I don't like hearing the same reason the second year in a row... Esp. given basically no battery improvement.

I don't find it satisfying, either. They've clearly been working on charging solutions since/before the 2013 model came out, though, and the products they release are what survive the process of design, testing, and probably a certain amount of market research ("who's going to buy this at X price?").

Yet their bikes remain small-form-factor machines physically that don't match their 650cc+-equivalent powertrains, and don't extract enough range out of the battery at speed. They're holding back, but probably just to keep from bleeding money on R&D and incompatible platform change costs.

[grmarks]

The big ticket items for 2018 should be (I hope) the 32ah pouches (or better) and a faster charger to replace the current onboard charger. Optional extras :- a faring for improved range, variable regen lever where the clutch lever goes and reverse would be nice to have.

Should we start a 2018 wish list thread now? 

[Killroy]

Anyone know if '17 bodies can be retrofitted to '16 models? In particular I'm eyeballing the new lockable storage @ '17 DSR.

Yes.  Zero is replacing my '15 plastics with the new premium painted plastics with the locking storage case under warranty. 

[Killroy]

DC Fast Charge would be great.  I did not think there were a lot in may area until I looked at the map.

[MajorMajor]

Yet their bikes remain small-form-factor machines physically

I really like the size of the zeros ATM