ElectricMotorcycleForum.com
Makes And Models => Zero Motorcycles Forum | 2013+ => Topic started by: Lecram on September 16, 2015, 09:00:51 PM
-
I bought the 25T HIGHER TORQUE GEARING OPTION for my 2015 DS. Any tips/instructions how to replace the current one?
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=15_6&products_id=182 (http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=15_6&products_id=182)
-
What type of tips are you looking for ?
Typically this would require you to
1) put bike up on a stand
2) remove tension from belt
3) remove bolts holding motor in (Put a hydraulic jack under motor with a towel to support it for when it comes loose, bonus if it has wheels.)
4) remove key screws from existing pulley (might need a torch if they gob'ed green locktite on it) [you don't need to remove the wires at controller if you do this right, just rotate the motor into a direction you can more easily work on it BUT you might need to also remove the swing arm]
4a optional) remove swing arm by first loosing the key screws in each nut on the inside. These are tiny bastards but not hard to find. Don't try to remove these nuts without removing the set screws or loosing them first!
5) remove pulley (likely need a pneumatic wrench for this of at least 90 psi)
6) remove key screws (should be two) from old pulley, clean, put some blue locktite (at minimal) on them and put into new pulley
7) Place new pulley on the motor and screw in front with pneumatic wrench
8) screw in key screws with allen key
9) place motor back into frame and make sure belt is in place
10) tighten left side bolts into motor
11) tighten right side bolts into motor and adjust standoffs to properly transfer force
12) Adjust belt tension at rear wheel and check for alignment. (this should be 40 - 45 kg if you are running 25/132 or 25/98. With SR's you can strip teeth off the belt if you run a lower tention than this. Not sure how it applies to size 4 bikes if at all, and if it doesn't go with 35kg)
These will help a lot!
I found these online - they seem quite good to me:
http://freepdfhosting.com/bb590a712d.pdf (http://freepdfhosting.com/bb590a712d.pdf)
http://freepdfhosting.com/3455cf1dcd.pdf (http://freepdfhosting.com/3455cf1dcd.pdf)
-
I would loosen the pulley bolt with the belt still on first that way you can use the belt and brake to hold the pulley in place otherwise you will most likely forced into using the wrong tools for the job,
This is much easier done on the fx platform vs the s platform as you cannot as easily disconnect the battery to remove motor from controller
-
Thanks a lot, guys!
-
Hello
Is there a smaller pulley available than the 25T for the fx?
A+ Marcel
-
If you want "smaller" then you go chain instead of belt.
From Zero you won't get anything smaller than 25.
I think I have a 25, 28, 98, and 132 at home lol
-
As you go smaller on the motor sprocket, you put more stress on the drive source belt or chain. Probably worse on chain.
I agree with conversion to chain if you want more, go larger on the rear. Chain is easier to lengthen than belt.
I believe that I read on here that people were ripping teeth off of the belt with a 25 on SR. Keep in mind that the difference
in speed will be significant. Top speed will be 85 mph. Pretty impressive if you are only going a few hundred feet,
but, you will get spanked when the ICE bike hits 3rd gear. Pretty embarrassing to have a Ninja 250 walk away from you on the Freeway.
SR Top speed listed at 102, FX ( which is the gearing you end up with ) is 85. 17 mph may not be that much when you drop a
'Busa from top speed of 190 down to 173 but, percentage wise, it is around 17%. Doubtful that you would be able to take
full advantage anyway, probably just spin the tire. You can see this on Tesla videos that go past 60 mph. Very impressive off the
line, but, just about any performance vehicle passes it soon after ( unless Ludicrous Mode upgrade installed and enabled ). I can
guarantee that if you ran a 1/4 mile that your time would be much slower, since you are topped out well before half way.
-
I am not so concerned about the higher stress on the belt, because the SR has much more torque with (I guess) the same belt. I don't care about the lower top speed. I barely go faster than 120 km/h. I try to avoid highways and rather stay on local roads. Especially with a passenger, I find the current torque too low.
-
If you get the chain kit you can then get a 12 tooth on the front instead of the 14, go karts sometimes use the 12s
If you want to make the fx snappier order a custom rear sprocket and/or custom front. But get the chain kit!!! It is going to make the bike loud but it's not something I ever regret, makes it more "motorcycle'y" if that makes sense
I believe McMaster has the front sprockets
-
Just making sure that you were aware of the trade off. I have changed my gearing twice on my FX. I first went to the 30 because I wanted higher top speed, and, when not going fast, greater range.
I switched shortly after to a 28, because of loss of some of the "fun" factor. The factory installed sprocket was very difficult. I tried heat, puller, and, other options available without damage to motor or
shaft. Eventually, I removed the motor and took to a local electric motor shop. They swapped sprockets in a couple minutes. Didn't even charge me, just wanted to see the bike once motor was back in.
Once you have the motor loosened. it is only a few more minutes to remove it. My feelings were that it was better to pay a professional who does this daily rather than save a few dollars and damage
something. Make sure that you apply appropriate torque, and something to make sure that it doesn't come loose when installing the new sprocket.
-
Is there a smaller pulley available than the 25T for the fx?
That you can buy and put right on? No. Zero uses a non-standard 14mm belt width and 520 chain, so like every option I've found that drops gearing below 5.28:1 (belt) or 5.41:1 (chain), either machine / welding work or custom fabrication will be needed.
Here's a 22T pulley for a standard 21mm-wide version of the 8mm-pitch belt Zero uses:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Gates-8MX-22S-21-1-Sprocket-8MX22S21-New-No-Box-/350428948756 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Gates-8MX-22S-21-1-Sprocket-8MX22S21-New-No-Box-/350428948756)
My machinist told me he can definitely narrow this pulley to 14mm, and my welder told me he could then weld the flange end back on. Neither gave me a price. :)
I'll be going with a 10/65 chain setup next time (20% more torque than the chain kit, with only minor machining of a Martin 50BS10-1 sprocket needed).
Ray
-
I don't care about the lower top speed. I barely go faster than 120 km/h. I try to avoid highways and rather stay on local roads. Especially with a passenger, I find the current torque too low.
Another solution - buy an SR! Sorry couldn't resist.
Note to future buyers of the S.
I had the choice of a discounted 2014 S or a 2015 SR. In the end I decided to go with the SR as I was worried I might end up feeling as you do now. I hardly ever use ALL its power but I certainly use more than the S can give, often. Even if Zero bought out a more powerful model, I wouldn't upgrade. On those rare occasions when I use all the power it has never struck me that it's not enough.
-
Another solution - buy an SR! Sorry couldn't resist.
The high torque option was much, much cheaper than trading my DS in for a SR ;D
-
Well that is certainly true. The SR is so versatile, you can ride with plenty of power or speed or as economical you you like. I love it.
-
How much more range does the high speed gearing offer? I'm not a torque or speed junkie either way,but a little added range would be helpful, 2013 s is good enough for me and my commute, but I do engage in a little throttle twisting every now and then!
-
I am not sure whether the high torque option will increase or decrease the range.
The main energy consumption factor is the air resistance. That won't change. The efficiency of a combustion engine is also dependent on the rpms, I guess an electric engine not that much. At the other hand, the acceleration with the smaller gear will theoretically use less energy.
Good stuff for thoughts!
-
The one thing I wonder is can you leave the gear on the front (motor) and change your rear sprocket and belt to suit, the high speed gearing and high torque gearing use the same front drive sprocket so just switching rear pulley and belt will send you back and forth between torque and speed, I'd like to see how it affects the range either way, anyone tried this?
-
smaller tooth will decrease range
You would have to have custom pockets for the rear made, and you have to go to a chain first
I don't know anyone who makes the drive pullies, if I did I'd have a belt on my go kart this time around
But I don't know where to source a belt that short.... So chain it is
-
I am not sure whether the high torque option will increase or decrease the range.
The main energy consumption factor is the air resistance. That won't change. The efficiency of a combustion engine is also dependent on the rpms, I guess an electric engine not that much.
I agree. Gearing changes the torque/power delivery, but it has no effect on the primary losses, of which air resistance is the huge majority. And I think Lecram's right, these bikes are so efficient through their entire operating range that a gearing change isn't going to have much effect on range.
-
True, physics will dictate what energy you use, the driven pulley and smaller belt are all part of the high speed gearing kit, the front pulley is the same as the torque option, making it easier to switch back and forth (if you don't mind removing the tire and swingarm)
-
No.... smaller front gear will give you less range. Period.... End of conversation. How much you can go on a debate about that all day.... But it WILL be less
-
No.... smaller front gear will give you less range. Period.... End of conversation. How much you can go on a debate about that all day.... But it WILL be less
OK, so you say that it will decrease the range and we are not allowed to disagree? That's an interesting way to discuss this. If you are so confident, you will undoubtedly have a clear evidence for this. I am curious.
-
Cortez, forums can be used to advance ones understanding, I simply wanted a basis of comparison, zero lists alternate options for the 2013 s/ds, stock gearing 28/132 or 25/98 high speed or 25/ 132 high torque, I'm curious of the benefits and downfalls and wanted to hear from someone who may have first hand experience
-
How much more range does the high speed gearing offer? I'm not a torque or speed junkie either way,but a little added range would be helpful, 2013 s is good enough for me and my commute, but I do engage in a little throttle twisting every now and then!
Riding around the suburbs (gently with traffic 60-80km/hr) I get 2km to 1% of charge (but I have never gone below 40% soc). Mixed, freeway/suburb, I get 1.5km to 1%
so if I get a full 100% from the battery then that would be 200km or 150km respectivly (no power tank).
for me that is plenty - as I said I have never had the battery below 40%.
-
No.... smaller front gear will give you less range. Period.... End of conversation. How much you can go on a debate about that all day.... But it WILL be less
OK, so you say that it will decrease the range and we are not allowed to disagree? That's an interesting way to discuss this. If you are so confident, you will undoubtedly have a clear evidence for this. I am curious.
Um no you can't disagree with physics... It's a law just like ohms law.... They don't change
It's really simple if your motor pulley gets smaller the distance traveled over 1000 rotations is less... There is NO arguing that.... If you put the 98 on the rear at the same time, the bike is going to be really really slow off the line and if you baby it off the line you will increase range like from Terry's quotes it will add up to about 10-15% more range. If you have the 25/98 and you go around flogging the throttle you will use more power than with the stock gearing because you will be pumping huge amperage to make up for the gearing trying to accelerate at the same rate with much much taller gearing ending at much higer speeds. The fx with the 25/98 or i took it even farther and left my 28 on the front is very slow of the line but will accelerate up past 100 with ease with the high speed gearing but dont expect it to accelerate even remotely close to the same rate.... up at 50 mph and higher the high speed gearing will be accelerating much quicker than thank stock where stock is topped out, the high speed will supposidly push you to 120+
Maybe KrazyED will chime in here we have disscussions many a time, well more so me asking for advise and what the final speeds might be, Thank you Ed!!!
Is that more the answer you wanted.....?
if you want more top speed, or potential range I would look into getting a slightly smaller rear sprocket if you already have a chain.
If you have a belt look into getting your hands on a 30 tooth front belt or even the 32tooth, which is insanely big, it will also bring the acceleration way down, but top speed up a fair amount....
wow this keyboard on the ipad is so much better than the phone what have i been doing my whole life!
-
Um no you can't disagree with physics... It's a law just like ohms law.... They don't change
It's really simple if your motor pulley gets smaller the distance traveled over 1000 rotations is less... There is NO arguing that....
That's true, and nobody's arguing with you about that. But that doesn't mean it costs more energy to go the same distance! Because the shorter (numerically higher) gear ratio means the load on the motor is lower -- that's exactly what gearing does -- it doesn't have to work as hard, so though you go less distance per revolution, the motor is doing less work per revolution, and if the efficiency of the motor doesn't change, it winds up a wash. If you have a motor (perhaps an ICE) that's more efficient with the lower gear, it can actually cause a decrease in fuel used to go the same distance.
Be careful with the absolutes. I've been an Engineer for 31 years now and the one consistent thing I find is that there are few if any absolutes in this business.
-
Without any of my own riding terry has openly stated that 55mph ish is the maximum efficient for zero
And he also proved that the high speed gearing is most efficient
You guys are asking if the faster accelerating gears are going to be more efficient... Well the other simple answer is
They are going to be better at accelerating, more efficient at accelerating, not more efficient overall.....
-
When we talk about physics, it costs a certain amount of energy to keep the bike rolling at a certain speed. The power is only needed to withstand the resistance. That's independent from the rpms of the engine. So theoretically, the energy use should be equal.
-
When we talk about physics, it costs a certain amount of energy to keep the bike rolling at a certain speed. The power is only needed to withstand the resistance. That's independent from the rpms of the engine. So theoretically, the energy use should be equal.
If your bike went 100 mph at 100%throttlr with the gearing and you make it go 60mph at that same 100% throttle by only changing the gearing. You think the bike that tops out at 60 is going to be more efficient than the bike that tops out at 100??? If they are both traveling a constant 55mph???? Furthermore you think the motor/bike going with top speed of 60 is going 55mph is going to draw the same amount of power as the 100mph bike going at 55% of its throttle....
Really???
-
When we talk about physics, it costs a certain amount of energy to keep the bike rolling at a certain speed. The power is only needed to withstand the resistance. That's independent from the rpms of the engine. So theoretically, the energy use should be equal.
If your bike went 100 mph at 100%throttlr with the gearing and you make it go 60mph at that same 100% throttle by only changing the gearing. You think the bike that tops out at 60 is going to be more efficient than the bike that tops out at 100??? If they are both traveling a constant 55mph???? Furthermore you think the motor/bike going with top speed of 60 is going 55mph is going to draw the same amount of power as the 100mph bike going at 55% of its throttle....
Really???
You think in combustion engine technology, and that's wrong. An EV doesn't have a throttle. So if you ride at max speed with 100% accelerator open, the speed will be limited by the max. engine revs, that is 6000 rpm. That has nothing to do with an open throttle or air resistance. So your speed is limited by the maximum power you allow by the accelerator against the air resistance. And that power is the same with a smaller and bigger gear.
-
When we talk about physics, it costs a certain amount of energy to keep the bike rolling at a certain speed. The power is only needed to withstand the resistance. That's independent from the rpms of the engine. So theoretically, the energy use should be equal.
If your bike went 100 mph at 100%throttlr with the gearing and you make it go 60mph at that same 100% throttle by only changing the gearing. You think the bike that tops out at 60 is going to be more efficient than the bike that tops out at 100??? If they are both traveling a constant 55mph? ??? Furthermore you think the motor/bike going with top speed of 60 is going 55mph is going to draw the same amount of power as the 100mph bike going at 55% of its throttle....
For what it's worth, you have provided no arguments for your incredulity. You could save all of us some time by just working out the logic or pointing us to a repeatable explanation.
Let's say that his premise is right: that the dominant factor in efficiency is overcoming resistance. The part of the argument that appears to have a reason for debate is that the motor and belt, when operating at a higher RPM, provide lower efficiency for the same speed because of internal losses (by some percentage which would be worth an estimate or calculation).
That's an argument I can buy, that took less space than your commentary. Let's try that next time!
-
Yikes....
Electric motors use more power at 100% throttle than they do at 50% throttle....
At 35 mph a fx can go 80 plus miles
At 60 it can barely go 30..... Does wind resistance equal all 10 of those miles? No some of it is the motor using more power at the higher speed....
-
Yikes....
Electric motors use more power at 100% throttle than they do at 50% throttle....
At 35 mph a fx can go 80 plus miles
At 60 it can barely go 30..... Does wind resistance equal all 10 of those miles? No some of it is the motor using more power at the higher speed....
That argument does not prove what you assert it does; you're relating power output to the throttle setting, which is accurate but the throttle is not a direct relation to speed or drag.
We're asserting that the dominant factor in the throttle setting at steady-state on level ground is the speed, because of rolling resistance. This appears to be uncontested. I think my argument about the RPMs adding some amount of internal losses is a factor that supports your implied assertion, but that doesn't make your argument believable.
Try to be less upset when people don't engage with you when you talk that way. You're insulting us.
-
Yikes....
Electric motors use more power at 100% throttle than they do at 50% throttle....
At 35 mph a fx can go 80 plus miles
At 60 it can barely go 30..... Does wind resistance equal all 10 of those miles? No some of it is the motor using more power at the higher speed....
Again: an electric bike doesn't have a throttle...
You are assuming that you have to turn the accelerator more when there is a smaller gear at the engine. And that's not necessarily true. You'd do better to at least try to understand what I am saying (even though I am not native english).
The motor is using more power at higher speeds due to the resistances
-
When we talk about physics, it costs a certain amount of energy to keep the bike rolling at a certain speed. The power is only needed to withstand the resistance. That's independent from the rpms of the engine. So theoretically, the energy use should be equal.
If your bike went 100 mph at 100%throttlr with the gearing and you make it go 60mph at that same 100% throttle by only changing the gearing. You think the bike that tops out at 60 is going to be more efficient than the bike that tops out at 100??? If they are both traveling a constant 55mph? ??? Furthermore you think the motor/bike going with top speed of 60 is going 55mph is going to draw the same amount of power as the 100mph bike going at 55% of its throttle....
The part of the argument that appears to have a reason for debate is that the motor and belt, when operating at a higher RPM, provide lower efficiency for the same speed because of internal losses (by some percentage which would be worth an estimate or calculation).
That's an argument I can buy, that took less space than your commentary. Let's try that next time!
I agree with that. The question is: do these few more revs really influence the range? Or is that so few that it is barely measurable?
-
yes if you drag the bike out to its maximum range YES IT IS GOING TO MATTER, your physically going to travel a distance that is much less than the other gears.... if you have the smaller gear in the front and stock in the back
how can you say an electic motorcycle doesnt have a throttle....? yes it does... and its a direct representation of how fast your are going. The gearing can increase or decrease this but the throttle serves the exact same function as in a gas motorcycle only difference is this would be a "fly by wire" style throttle where it goes into a computer like most modern cars have.....
-
the true problem is everyone has a different view of efficency...
are you trying to.....
go maximum distance in shortest time
go maximum distance using least power
go maximum distance using least power and shortest time
some are looking at it as which is the most efficent to go the maximum distance the fastest (tallest gearing (25/98))
if you were looking the maximum distance and didnt care about time, well shit run no sprocket and push the fucker....
which would be the same as I beleive what your getting at lecram, maximum efficency to you is .... most efficent acceleration, you dont care about top speed so the time would go out the door as well. so you want to know if the 25 in the front 132 rear is going to be more efficent accelerating than the 28/ 132
if you really want to know i can set 2 bikes up on a stand one with a 25 and one with a 28 tooth fronts
or maybe a 30 front to give us all more accurate and bigger spread in the results
I could set both bikes up fully charged accelerate at max throttle so many seconds see which bike used most power, then do same thing riding them so you can get results loaded and unloaded..... that would prove the efficency...
they arnt all the same question, sorry for my arguementative ways....
i look at efficeny as total distance covered least amount of time and power... so to me 25/98 will always be most efficent as proven by terry.....
-
Cortez....again....nobody's arguing that with shorter gearing, it's going to take more motor revolutions to travel a given distance. BUT with the shorter gearing, the motor has to exert less force (torque) while it's doing so, which means it can use less fuel per revolution. It's even possible that the motor might operate more efficiently at the higher rpm, which is actually fairly common among ICE engines. That would mean that even though the motor has to turn MORE rpms to travel the same distance, it still might do it using LESS fuel.
My point all along has been that the electric motors used in our bikes are very efficient in almost every corner of their operating envelope, which means they can very efficiently give you power at almost any rpm. If your bike is using 5 horsepower to stir the air (aerodynamic drag) at a given speed, it almost doesn't matter what rpm the motor is turning to give you that power. There's no guarantee you'll get more miles per kWh with higher gearing than you'd get with lower gearing.
-
maybe terry will chime in on that very last sentence... Ive messaged him, ive read something somewhere where he responded to that exact question, I know results riding my fx's but it might be totally different on the 250lbs heavier s platforms. The 250lbs might make the efficency change.
-
yes if you drag the bike out to its maximum range YES IT IS GOING TO MATTER, your physically going to travel a distance that is much less than the other gears.... if you have the smaller gear in the front and stock in the back
how can you say an electic motorcycle doesnt have a throttle....? yes it does... and its a direct representation of how fast your are going. The gearing can increase or decrease this but the throttle serves the exact same function as in a gas motorcycle only difference is this would be a "fly by wire" style throttle where it goes into a computer like most modern cars have.....
This is a throttle:
(http://www.firstfives.org/faq/throttle/Throttle_plate.jpg)
I have never seen this on an electric bike. You probably meant an accelerator. Well, that is no more than a potentiometer that tells the Sevcon how much power the engine may use. It seems that you won't understand that a 10% lower ratio means a 10% higher need of energy. The need of power is the same. And the power determines the energy consumption.
I am done with this discussion.
-
Here directly from the zero service website....
I'll get a color picture off my bikes if you need, they have the same "throttle" on the original Electricross's if you want a electric motorcycle history lesson I'll show you one on the Electricross and all the years leading up to a 13 if you would like....
(http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o237/SC1975Silent/Mobile%20Uploads/2015-09/EBA1621A-A96F-492D-844C-F7B71385B25D_zpsmcytei65.jpg) (http://s121.photobucket.com/user/SC1975Silent/media/Mobile%20Uploads/2015-09/EBA1621A-A96F-492D-844C-F7B71385B25D_zpsmcytei65.jpg.html)
Now you can get offended....
-
Sorry to rejoin the fray at such a late date. Most of the arguments are valid given the person's goal. If I want to go to Cross Country, or, to Bonneville, I don't care what the Zero to 60 time is.
If I am only going stoplight to stoplight, I don't care if the bike can go 200 miles per hour. The efficiency question also has to take into account the riding being done. If going across a flat,
straight, endless, breeze free section of road at 35 mph, then, the taller the gearing the better ( to a point ). I never have to adjust the throttle ( sorry ) position to compensate, so, will continue
at constant drain until dead. If a rather equal amount of up and downhill are factored in, then, the the shorter gearing may be more efficient as it will add more regen rpms per mile than the
taller gearing. As speed increases, wind resistance becomes more of a factor. Not wanting to get into all of the calculations required, I did a quick search and found a link for someone who did
HP figures for a Chevrolet Cruze ECO horsepower needed to maintain 55, 65, and, 75 mph. 55 = 10.5 hp, 65 = 13.2 hp, and, 75 = 16.4 hp. Difficult to make direct comparisons as there are
such a wide range of variables. That being said, it looks like about 60% more power needed at 75 mph than 55 mph. Even greater difference if you went 35 to 85. This seems to follow what
Zero publishes for range. One of the first things that i usually do to my vehicles is to go to taller gearing as this has historically worked best for MY needs. My FX was no different. I went to a
30 tooth front as I wanted a 100 mph top speed, and, i wanted to shoot for a 100 mile range. Not at the same time of course. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, that was too tall for my
wishes, so, switched almost immediately to a 28. This gives me MOST of the fun of the 25 with a top speed not far off from 100, and, I have had several charges where I have achieved over
90 miles of range. Again, not at the same time. The RANGE RUNS are at uncomfortably low speeds.
Testing that I did with an Electric Toyota Paseo also showed that lower rpm ( taller gearing ) produced greater range. Most people at the time were saying to pick a gear, leave it there
all day and go. The person that I bought the car from said that he used 3rd. I did this, and, was always concerned that I might not make my 20 mile commute. I started using all 5 gears.
Initially taking each gear up to as high an RPM as was safe before going to the next gear, not fast, just held each gear as long as needed. This produced a low amp draw, and, greater range.
I noticed that if I happened to leave it in a taller gear rather than shift down ( no regen ), that my amps went up, but, my voltage use went down. So, I tried short shifting. Used all 5 gears,
but, shifted out of each gear as early as possible. Again, amps were higher, but, voltage use was lessened, and, again, my range increased. I ended up getting close to 50 mile range with this
driving style. The Toyota had a DC motor, so, not sure how applicable this would be to compare to the AC motors in the Zero.
I generally do the math to see what SHOULD happen before I make a change, then, make one change at a time and verify results. Unfortunately, I did not do any real RANGE RUNS with
the 25 tooth on the FX before I switched. I do know that the range is greater with the 28 under similar riding, but, can not attest to the exact amount.
The BEST option is to have a Vehicle for each desired task. One for top speed, One for Range, One for passenger, etc.. Since this is not really an option for most of us, then, we have to go
with what meets our needs to the greatest extent. If I were to start over, I would probably keep the 25 front for everyday riding ( MAX FUN ), and, swap to the 98 tooth rear for max range.
This would be ( FOR ME ) the easiest way to have TWO bikes. Less time to swap wheel / gear / belt than to swap motor sprocket.
Sorry if I rambled. If anyone has any questions or comments, feel free to PM or email.
-
I thought I'd add my 2 cents in the form of an experiment (http://ptruchon.pagekite.me/wiki/blog/2015-09-19/does_gear_size_affect_range): I used my drill to lift a bucket using a piece of string. One set used the drill as is, the other set doubled the radius ("gear"). I won't spoil the results, but it should help figure it out whether or not a different gearing option changes the range...
-
Did you also change the RPM on your drill to lift the thing in exactly the same amount of time? Or did the "taller" gearing lift it quicker? Did you measure the time it took to reach the target RPM from 0? Some food for thought, so you can properly interpret the results of your experiment. Hint: the impact of varying acceleration is huge, and changing a gear without changing the RPM means you are asking the drill to "accelerate" much faster which means it will draw much more current.
The above logic applies to the Paseo gear shifting too. If starting from dead stop in 5th gear you need to make sure you are using the same amps as you would in 1st gear. This means, you would have slower acceleration and higher top speed for the same RPM!
Also, the Ah one can get out of the same battery is quite different, depending on the current drawn. At high currents, you get fewer Ah out of a "fully" charged battery before it "fully" discharges. In other words, the effective capacity of the battery is smaller at higher current draws. So, taller gearing, if used to accelerate at the same rate as lower gearing, will be drawing more current, and even though it performs the same work, it will give lower mileage range ;-)
I thought I'd add my 2 cents in the form of an experiment (http://ptruchon.pagekite.me/wiki/blog/2015-09-19/does_gear_size_affect_range): I used my drill to lift a bucket using a piece of string. One set used the drill as is, the other set doubled the radius ("gear"). I won't spoil the results, but it should help figure it out whether or not a different gearing option changes the range...
-
Did you also change the RPM on your drill to lift the thing in exactly the same amount of time? Or did the "taller" gearing lift it quicker? Did you measure the time it took to reach the target RPM from 0? Some food for thought, so you can properly interpret the results of your experiment. Hint: the impact of varying acceleration is huge, and changing a gear without changing the RPM means you are asking the drill to "accelerate" much faster which means it will draw much more current.
If you click on the the experiment link (http://ptruchon.pagekite.me/wiki/blog/2015-09-19/does_gear_size_affect_range) you'll find more details, including the original videos that I made to record the data. But long story short:
I lifted the bucket a bunch of times at different speeds (using only the "trigger" control, I didn't change the fast/slow setting). I did that by wrapping the string around 2-cm wheel and again around a 4-cm wheel (doubling the "gear" size). Each time, I tried my best to keep the speed constant. After, I used the video time signature to measure how long each lift took, and estimated the "average" current drawn during the lift from the multimeter readings.
You'll find that the data is pretty clean considering how half-assed my setup was. Of course there's some noise in the data, but the trend is clear I think. To be honest, I wasn't expecting to get results that clear. I just wanted to see if I'd be able to see a trend...
-
I did it! It was much more work as expected, but I succeeded. The hardest part was to remove the center screw. I already removed the belt so the shaft turned with the screw. I finally used a pully puller to fix the gear and was able to unscrew the hex. That hew was very much tightened!
I removed the gear with the same pully puller and mounted the new gear.
It works great, much more acceleration power. The highest speed is now 135 km/h, for me that's enough. I achieve that speed in an instant. The speedo shows a 20% higher speed than the real speed, measured with a GPS.
-
other pics
-
other pics
-
I believe there is a method to adjust the speedo reading on the dash. It would be worth searching the forum for the info.
-
The method involves changing a setting in the firmware. The OBD-II port provides serial access to it. The easiest way to manage this is to use DigiNow's Reaper Bluetooth plug from Hollywood Electrics. https://hollywoodelectrics.com/product/diginow-data-reaper-dongle/
-
On the 13 Koso gauge you can hold the buttons and just change the "r" value and that changes the calibration
-
On the 13 Koso gauge you can hold the buttons and just change the "r" value and that changes the calibration
This is what I was thinking of. Didn't realise it was so involved on the newer bikes. Sorry!
-
On the 13 Koso gauge you can hold the buttons and just change the "r" value and that changes the calibration
Whoa! I did not realize what Zero's gauge cluster came from!
The 2011-2013 models appear to be based on the RX-1N (http://kosonorthamerica.com/product/rx-1n/).
2010 and earlier models appear to be based on the RX-SR (http://kosonorthamerica.com/product/xr-sr-multi-functions/).
And they have instruction manuals! (I've immediately added these to my Dropbox collection of Zero-related technical documents)
The 2014+ models are more obviously a custom application, but maybe some tinkering will reveal the nature of their operation.
-
The speedometer is able to be calibrated by way of the dash, nothing outside needed.
If you have programming access, either by way of Factory, or, DigiNow Dongle, then,
you can change the tooth count in software, but, I believe you would still need to
calibrate via dash after. It's been a while, but, you hold down both buttons and go
from there. Instructions should be available here with a quick search. I did my
2012 XU and my 2013 FX. Both ended up being almost exact over a 20 mile
know range ride. They are generally 2% to 4% optimistic from the factory.