ElectricMotorcycleForum.com
Makes And Models => Energica => Topic started by: SebfromBE on November 27, 2019, 04:44:16 PM
-
Hi,
Following the unveiling of the new models, my dealer here in proposing a deal on 2019 Eva107.
Quite nice bike. Full carbon extras, Windscreen, 12V outlet,... I am hesitating to go for it: He is proposing like at a 25% price cut compared to the 2020 model (of course then also, with the smaller battery).
I did a test drive and for sure, that's a different planet compared to my current S 2017
Questions I have:
1) A bit scared on range. At the moment I am averaging typically ~ 170km/charge with my S 2017 (with the 13kWh battery pack). I fear a bit with the smaller pack (especially long time. Any high mileage Energica have experienced range reduction?
2) Anybody know if there is anything new in the 2020 bikes aside from the battery & slight weight reduction? Like new controller or else, ...?
3) In the end, this offer brings it about ~ 2500E cheaper than a similarly equipped (except the carbon parts) EsseEsse9 with the big battery...So... anybody has an experience comparing the EVA107 vs the EsseEsse?
Thanks in advance for your input... The test drive really got me, so just now have to be sure on best choice to make. Since the power of the bike is now clearly enough, I expect to keep the bike for longer...
-
The Eva actually has a higher nominal capacity over the 13 kWh Zero S: 11.7 kWh vs 11.4 kWh. You really shouldn't see reduced range unless if you travel at higher speeds than before.
-
My personal best on my 2020 (US) EsseEsse9 is about 88km from 100% down to about 5% at about 96kph. No reduction in range in nearly 8000 km but i have noticed warmer weather gives me a bit more range than cold weather. Maybe as much as a 10% bump but that’s not a scientific measurement.
The latest bikes’ improvements over mine are the larger 21kw battery, slightly lower weight and the option for a keyless ignition. The new Ribelle also uses the same side cases as the EsseEsse9 instead of the smaller side bags that were offered for the Eva107.
When I bought my EsseEsse9 I was on the fence between the Eva107 and the EsseEsse9. In the end, the comfort of the EsseEsse9 won out. I’ve since found out that as far as the new Ribelle goes, the EsseEsse9 footpegs and bars will bolt right on so you could get the same EsseEsse9 rider geometry on the new Ribelle. I would guess the same holds true for the Eva107 but I haven’t confirmed.
-
Hi Bigpoppa,
Thanks for your insights. Since you seem to have tested both Eva & EsseEsse, any comment aside from the riding position? Any difference in riding experience with respect to power delivery?
Cheers,
Seb
-
There was a noticeable difference in power between the Eva107 and the EsseEsse9. At the time, I didn't feel like it was enough of a difference that I would miss it. I still don't miss the power of the Eva107 BUT I do plan on moving to one of the new bikes with the larger battery and when I'll do I'll move up to the Eva Ribelle for the added benefit of more power now that I can get a riding position similar to the EsseEsse9 fairly easily.
It's just a power junkie thing. You never regret having more power...lol.
-
Hi, SebfromBE
Zero owner here, but the advice is the same. If it's only a 2500E difference between the 19 Eva and the large battery SS9 I would go with the SS9 easy. Since 2500E won't buy you a replacement 13kWh battery, paying the little bit extra to get almost a doubled battery capacity is really a no brainer.
The bigger battery will of course go farther and handle heat better and will be much more desirable at resale time.
-
My dealer has ridden the new models. performance is blistering. He says the 200 NM torque of the new Esse equals the feeling of the current Ego/Eva 107, despite being still listed as 80 KW. Not even to mention the torque of the New Eva Ribelle, which he described as scary. He says the 15 kg weight reduction has also come from the top of the battery, so really noticeable. In general I can say that Energica batteries really hold up well; controller and parts quality is another level than you are used to now ;)
If you like the Esse to begin with, I would go for the 2020
-
The Eva actually has a higher nominal capacity over the 13 kWh Zero S: 11.7 kWh vs 11.4 kWh. You really shouldn't see reduced range unless if you travel at higher speeds than before.
Zero's 14.4 is 11.628kWh nominal. Zero's 13.0 is 10.6kWh nominal. 104Ah pack x 102V nominal = 10608Wh or 10.6kWh
-
@SebfromBE if you manage 170km on 10,6 kWh nominal as an average, kudos for your wrist discipline. Are you from Belgium Btw?
-
The Eva actually has a higher nominal capacity over the 13 kWh Zero S: 11.7 kWh vs 11.4 kWh. You really shouldn't see reduced range unless if you travel at higher speeds than before.
Battery capacity is hardly the only thing that matters.
Different motors, reduction gear vs. direct drive, Different regen schemes & profile customization options.
not to mention 280kg vs. 185kg curb weight...
-
Hi, SebfromBEThe bigger battery will of course go farther and handle heat better and will be much more desirable at resale time.
Don't get fooled by the KWH rating. With batteries such KWH ratings changes with the load. The new battery is a different design than the old.
While it gets 100% better range than the old battery at slow speeds, it's only 40% better at higher speeds by Energica's own specs.
It is very possible that the old battery gives better range than the new at even higher speeds. And most of us do not buy Energicas for their slow speed range.
And why does a larger KWH battery charge slower per mile than the old?
It seems rather obvious that they are rating their KWH with the new battery where they can claim the very best numbers, which may not be how we ride.
IOW, you cannot always compare a KWH to a KWH between different batteries. Games can be played with specs. I would like to see the large gain at the higher speeds, not the lower.
The new battery gives more reason to go slow than the old, because there is a lot more range gain by going slower with the new battery than the old.
-Don- Payson, AZ (RV)
-
And why does a larger KWH battery charge slower per mile than the old?
The new bike charges at the exact same speed as the current bikes.
Brandon and I are planning on doing certified range tests comparing everything out there available in the US. This includes 13.4 and 21.5 Energicas, the LiveWire, and the SR/F. We'll start doing this next year. Until we have data there's no reason to assume anything.
-
You can't get 100% better at high speeds by doubling the battery size.
That's not how batteries work.
-Crissa
-
The new bike charges at the exact same speed as the current bikes.
Both batteries can handle a charge up to 26 KW? I am only asking about the CCS charging, I realize the on-board charges at 3 KW on each (240 VAC).
Brandon and I are planning on doing certified range tests comparing everything out there available in the US. This includes 13.4 and 21.5 Energicas, the LiveWire, and the SR/F. We'll start doing this next year. Until we have data there's no reason to assume anything.
Thanks! But until then, all we can do is guess and make assumptions based on what Energica has said so far about their new battery.
Patiently waiting for your test rides. Only then will I will stop all my guesswork and assumptions. ;D
-Don- Payson, AZ (RV)
-
Both batteries can handle a charge up to 26 KW? I am only asking about the CCS charging, I realize the on-board charges at 3 KW on each (240 VAC).
Correct.
-
You can't get 100% better at high speeds by doubling the battery size.
That's not how batteries work.
-Crissa
If a KWH was always a KWH, why would you NOT get twice the time (range) at any given steady speed when the KWH is doubled?
IMO, the only possible answer is that a KWH is not always a KWH because of how they spec each battery. Is there anything else I could be missing?
-Don- Payson, AZ (RV)
-
@SebfromBE if you manage 170km on 10,6 kWh nominal as an average, kudos for your wrist discipline. Are you from Belgium Btw?
Thanks for the feedback and insight on the new model!
Yes I am from Belgium and the 170 figure is mostly because I use it as commuter mostly on national road... So more or less perfect conditions to get most range out of the battery for sure.
With all these advices... Sounds more and more reasonable to spend the extra bucks and go directly for the updated modeL... Let's sleep on it for a week. I will also need good arguments for my wife :-)
Thx all!
-
@SebfromBE if you manage 170km on 10,6 kWh nominal as an average, kudos for your wrist discipline. Are you from Belgium Btw?
Thanks for the feedback and insight on the new model!
Yes I am from Belgium and the 170 figure is mostly because I use it as commuter mostly on national road... So more or less perfect conditions to get most range out of the battery for sure.
With all these advices... Sounds more and more reasonable to spend the extra bucks and go directly for the updated modeL... Let's sleep on it for a week. I will also need good arguments for my wife :-)
Thx all!
Tough call, since presumably you can't put off the decision until you (and others) can actually test the difference between the old & new batteries.
-
You can't get 100% better at high speeds by doubling the battery size.
That's not how batteries work.
-Crissa
But isn't that exactly how a kWh is defined (http://kWh is defined)?
Let's say battery A's capacity, p, in kWh is whatever energy is needed to travel k miles at speed v (meaning the battery can deliver some instantaneous rate of kW r for t time) -- as the bike vendor defined it, meaning they chose some dvantageous-to-them value for v.
If battery B has 2p capacity (twice the capacity in kWh that A does), assuming all other test conditions are equal, by definition it can sustain that rate r for 2t time, and so cover 2k distance at speed v.
If it can't, whoever is providing the numbers is misusing the definitions.
Sure, I'm ignoring some stuff here, like battery thermal management etc.
The key point still holds. Any sag, internal resistance etc. issues have to be taken into account and discounted in advance, because the definition of kWh is functional; what matters is what the system (battery) can observably deliver.
-
But isn't that exactly how a kWh is defined (http://kWh is defined)?
No. It's defined as a load at a certain amperage over time. So lead-acid batteries are rated by how long (Amp hours) they can draw one amp. But if you do it all at once, you don't get that number of amps. And wattage is amps x volts.
When the bike is going 60 mph, you're drawing much higher than that amount, and hence, get less from the battery.
-Crissa
-
No. It's defined as a load at a certain amperage over time.
Try telling that to PG&E or any other electric power company. There, a KWH is exactly a KWH regardless of load, as in MOST (all?) cases other than batteries.
But all batteries have ways to cheat on specs, and perhaps should not even be rated in KWH, but something more useful, depending on how actually used.
IMO, Zero is constant in their ratings. Get a Zero battery exactly twice the KWH rating and you will get very close to double the range at any speed. Perhaps a mile less at some speeds because of the extra weight, but Zero is very reasonable when you compare their battery KWH sizes. They stay consistent. Very simple, get twice the KWH with Zero and expect twice the range well within reason at ANY speed.
Such is NOT the case when comparing Energica's two batteries. It gets double the range at slow speeds but less than 40% at higher speeds. The KWH rating is 62% better. It should get very close to 62% better range at ALL speeds just as do the Zeros for their KWH increase. Zero motorcycles are constant with how they rate and compare their batteries on the same model bike, unlike Energica.
For EVs, I like the way Tesla does it. They tell you all the info. reasonably possible, 75KWH of battery and then there is a chart available to give the range at any speed it is capable of on level ground at 70F. They use 65 MPH as their main spec. I wish electric motorcycles would do the same. I would rather ONLY see a spec at 65 MPH on all bikes than all that "city, urban, mixed" BS which really tells us almost nothing in everyday riding. I would find a freeway speed range at 70 MPH to be more useful to compare between bikes.
So lead-acid batteries are rated by how long (Amp hours) they can draw one amp. But if you do it all at once, you don't get that number of amps.
That depends on the plate spacing in a lead-acid battery. You will get more "than that number of amps" by draining an engine starting battery "all at once". More CCA as it is designed for "all at once".
With true (not the cheap "Marine Deep Cycle") deep cycle batteries (like in the house section of this RV) it also uses lead acid. The spacing of plates is much farther apart, so the batteries are designed the opposite than the engine starting batteries. They are also larger, more expensive, and a lot heavier but have much LESS CCA "Cold Cranking Amps" and they also last a very long time (usually more than ten years) as with these, they will drain VERY fast with a heavy load and VERY slow with a small load, the opposite of an engine stating battery.
-Don- in rainy Payson, AZ
-
No. It's defined as a load at a certain amperage over time.
Try telling that to PG&E or any other electric power company. There, a KWH is exactly a KWH regardless of load, as in MOST (all?) cases other than batteries.
No, that's literally dependent upon load.
If there's no load, there's no kilowatts.
Their formula is load (amps) x supply (volts) = watts.
More CCA as it is designed for "all at once"
That's merely instantaneous draw. You can't go a mile on it because it's an amount of time measured in thirty seconds.
Different batteries have different curves, which I already said. Zeros are closer to 'true' because of their demand curve is near their supply curve - but Energicas use more power and so can't be near the demand curve of standard batteries.
-Crissa
-
No, that's literally dependent upon load.
If there's no load, there's no kilowatts.
Which proves my point. Zero KWHs is exactly zero KWH, just like a thousand KWH is exactly a thousand KWHs. Load makes NO difference, as a KWH is exactly a KWH to the power companies regardless of load, even if the load is zero. Then you get no charge for the amount of juice used, which was zero KWH (not counting if they have a minimum usage charge, of course).
Are you sure you understand the difference between a KW and a KWH? A watt and a watt-hour? A watt needs a load to be a true watt. Watt is a unit of power. KWH is not. KWH a measurement of power used over a period of time and the load can be zero or anything else. Same with the amount of time.
A WH does NOT need a load to count the WHs. Zero WH is zero watts for even a million hours at a zero KW load. A billion KWH is a billion KW for an hour (or two billion KWs for a half hour, or a half billion KWs for two hours, etc), no exceptions in any case other than with batteries (AFAIK).
With any battery, the KWH changes with a different draw. IOW, A KWH is only a KWH at the load they decide to measure it at, unlike from the power company where a true KWH is always a true KWH regardless of load.
So a battery can be spec'ed where they get the very best KWH reading, even if it is NEvER used at that load in the real world.
But to be fair to Energica, there is no real way to compare their old battery to the new one, as it is a totally different design. But their own specs well prove a KWH is NOT a KWH when the load is changed. The older battery has less KWH difference with speed gains than does the new and it would not surprise me if at very high speeds the older battery really has the best range. It certainly will be a lot closer to the same, as shown by their own specs. But we will soon find out, which will stop all my guessing by having the facts.
And FWIW, I hope there is a large increase with the newer battery at higher speeds, but I have my doubts.
-Don- in raining HARD Payson, AZ (RV)
-
But to be fair to Energica, there is no real way to compare their old battery to the new one, as it is a totally different design. But their own specs well prove a KWH is NOT a KWH when the load is changed. The older battery has less KWH difference with speed gains than does the new and it would not surprise me if at very high speeds the older battery really has the best range. It certainly will be a lot closer to the same, as shown by their own specs. But we will soon find out, which will stop all my guessing by having the facts.
Don't forget they skimmed 15kg. With start-stop urban use, that will make a difference where the motor operates in the -inefficient- low revs. Maybe they also tweaked eco-mode. For highway I don't know, could it be that the battery voltage has also changed which could be shifting the operating area of the engine (volts-amps) to a bit less efficient area. As we all know, highway range >60mph is so dependant on a few miles faster/slower, head wind/tail wind etcetera, that I am not worried with not getting exactly 60% more above 60 mph. It's still an EV...
-
I am not worried with not getting exactly 60% more above 60 mph. It's still an EV...
Of course it will depend on how it's ridden, but I am mainly concerned about range at around 75 MPH (~120 KMH) on the new SS9 battery and that could be perhaps as low as no gain over the older battery. IAC, I have decided to wait and see what happens at 75 MPH before making any decision if I want the new battery.
-Don- in rainy Payson, AZ (RV)
-
@SebfromBE if you manage 170km on 10,6 kWh nominal as an average, kudos for your wrist discipline. Are you from Belgium Btw?
Thanks for the feedback and insight on the new model!
Yes I am from Belgium and the 170 figure is mostly because I use it as commuter mostly on national road... So more or less perfect conditions to get most range out of the battery for sure.
With all these advices... Sounds more and more reasonable to spend the extra bucks and go directly for the updated modeL... Let's sleep on it for a week. I will also need good arguments for my wife :-)
Thx all!
Hi Seb, I'm from Belgium too and I recently bought an Esseesse9. You must be very disciplined to get these numbers... Expect less on the Energica because it really teases you to misbehave ;) even in rain mode I tend to find myself over 130km/h on 90 roads. It's the noise that made me do it, officer ;)
-
even in rain mode I tend to find myself over 130km/h on 90 roads. It's the noise that made me do it, officer ;)
What is your max speed in rain mode? Is it different than USA models? I don't think my 2020 SS9 can go 130 KMH (81 MPH) in either the rain or eco modes.
-Don- in snowy Payson, AZ (RV).
-
even in rain mode I tend to find myself over 130km/h on 90 roads. It's the noise that made me do it, officer ;)
What is your max speed in rain mode? Is it different than USA models? I don't think my 2020 SS9 can go 130 KMH (81 MPH) in either the rain or eco modes.
-Don- in snowy Payson, AZ (RV).
I think only Eco mode is speed limited to 90km/h. Rain mode is only torque limited. In fact it pulls quite eagerly around 90km/h ;)
I just bought the bike, and the weather has been really bad here so I've don't have much experience yet with other riding modes than rain. Though my first commute was in sport mode, and it felt fine ;)
-
I think only Eco mode is speed limited to 90km/h. Rain mode is only torque limited. In fact it pulls quite eagerly around 90km/h ;)
I just bought the bike, and the weather has been really bad here so I've don't have much experience yet with other riding modes than rain. Though my first commute was in sport mode, and it felt fine ;)
Perhaps I never tried rain mode. I normally just keep it in the "urban" mode, which is fast enough for me. I tried eco the day I bought the bike and never tried that again. Eco was rather useless, IMO.
-Don- in rainy & snowy Payson, AZ (RV)
-
Rain mode severely limits torque which is especially useful for models pre-traction control.
-
@SebfromBE if you manage 170km on 10,6 kWh nominal as an average, kudos for your wrist discipline. Are you from Belgium Btw?
Thanks for the feedback and insight on the new model!
Yes I am from Belgium and the 170 figure is mostly because I use it as commuter mostly on national road... So more or less perfect conditions to get most range out of the battery for sure.
With all these advices... Sounds more and more reasonable to spend the extra bucks and go directly for the updated modeL... Let's sleep on it for a week. I will also need good arguments for my wife :-)
Thx all!
Hi Seb, I'm from Belgium too and I recently bought an Esseesse9. You must be very disciplined to get these numbers... Expect less on the Energica because it really teases you to misbehave ;) even in rain mode I tend to find myself over 130km/h on 90 roads. It's the noise that made me do it, officer ;)
Interesting! I am basically decided to go for the new Eva model with the big battery. I just mail my order to the dealer. Waiting for him to confirm the order now...
I actually had a chat with the European sales manager about the new bikes. He expect an order placed now should lead to a delivery around ~ March-April. Fine with me if they stick tohthe timing. This way I have time to sell properly my current Zero, and weather will hopefully be just perfect for the first rides :-)
Dryhte: How was your experience with the dealer? Did you just buy one of the 2019 remaining model then? I actually found him OK but not fully responsive...
Cheers,
Seb
-
I also expect that indeed there is/will be a clear relationship between 'more power = less range :-) ' from the Eva test drive, it seems clear it will be though to keep the beast tamed!
-
I bought from Electric Motorcycles Zeeland, found them very responsive and eager to offer me test rides, or a rental which would be refunded if I bought. Never took them up on this last thing though ;) They're closer to my home than the dealer around Leuven.
Very happy with the bike, but I'll probably keep my Strom for longer trips.
-
Order confirmed!
Dark grey Eva ribelle :-)
They are currently quoting for a March delivery. According to the Euro-area sales manager, they are getting a quite good inflow of order.
-
Order confirmed!
Dark grey Eva ribelle :-)
They are currently quoting for a March delivery. According to the Euro-area sales manager, they are getting a quite good inflow of order.
Congratulations :)
-
Congrats Seb!
I still have to book my test ride but since the single BE dealer didn't have test bikes they forwarded me to Zeeland also. I'll probably wait for spring to actually book a test ride. Then the new models should be available for testing. And by then I'll know if my SRF was ever fixed or not :D.
-
Hi Hans,
Interesting. So He did not have anymore the 2019 Eva as test ride?
I rode the SRF few days before trying the Eva. It makes it quite easy to feel the difference in build quality/ride experience. Of course there is still a clear price difference here in BE.
I'll update this tread once I get my model. Long wait still => It's going to be a tough winter :o
-
Okay maybe I misunderstood then. A mont ago I contacted them and then they didn't have it but I could test ride the existing models. March then was probably the date he gave for first deliveries of the new model.
Looking forward to your findings!