ElectricMotorcycleForum.com

Is this also true for other bikes 2020 and newer in the zero lineup or just the SRF?

[/quote]

This is no longer true for 2020 models. For EU regulations, they had to add an OBD compliant port that works with standard readers. There are now two OBD ports on 2020 non FST bikes. It also has 12V supplied where you expect it. The FST platform bikes have one port but it works just fine with readers
[/quote]

That's a nice setup

Nice place to go riding!

Another thing is that torque is power. So torque to weight ratio is power to weight ratio.
SNIP

Actually that's not correct.  Torque is force at a radial distance in a rotating system.  Power results when that force does some work by rotating that system and energy is consumed over a period of time.  Torque can be applied and if the there is an equal resistance there will be zero rotation and therefore zero power and energy consumed.  So torque does not equal power.

But torque is the thing that applies the force where the rubber meets the road and that is what determines, given an amount of friction, whether the tire will grip or there will be slippage.

All I was trying to suggest in this thread is that traditionally motorcycles and other performance machines have been evaluated by a power/weight specification (among other things) and when comparing internal combustion powered bikes it's an apples to apples comparison, which will give you a sense of its performance.  Electric bikes can certainly be evaluated that way too, but since the character and the way an IC engine develops torque is drastically different than an electric motor,  I just felt that perhaps in this case a torque/weight spec might be more meaningful.  I think in the absence of traction control, a number for torque/weight gives a more intuitive sense of what the rider is holding in the right hand, but just my opinion.

As a new FX owner I enjoyed reading the Too Much Torque thread.  I also was surprised on my first few rides how different the throttle response can be on an electric bike compared to an ICE engine even though having owned a Ducati years back I thought I understood about low end torque.  Not that I have had a mishap yet but certainly felt the edge of that boundary where a fun ride can turn into a bad day real fast.  Going uphill and encountering wet mud along a forest service road on the stock tires certainly gave me reason to consider turning around when I found the next dry spot.  It is common to talk about power to weight ratio but reading that thread prompted me to think with electric motors maybe it makes sense to think in terms of torque to weight? 

If I take the 274lb empty weight of a modular FX divided into its 78ftlb of torque it comes out at 0.315.  For comparison the SR/S with 140ftlb and 518lb empty weight comes in significantly lower at 0.217 so the lowly FX has considerably more torque available for its weight than the SR/S.  However to be more meaningful the rider weight needs to be included which brings the numbers for a 180lb rider to 0.200 for the SR/S and 0.182 for the FX illustratingthat the SR/S throttle demands more respect for the average rider than the FX.  With a lighter rider such as myself at 150lb the gap narrows to 0.209 for the SR/S and 0.196 for the FX.  A 110lb woman riding each of these machines would result in 0.222 (SR/S) and 0.218 (FX) which is almost equal.  But consider a small woman on an FX compared to a 180lb male on a SR/S.  She would actually face more potential for loss of traction on the FX than the heavier rider on an SR/S, and when you consider normal force on the rear wheel which is the main factor in traction, the lghter rider on an FX definitely has a handful (no pun intended) to deal with.

@mdjak1  Thanks, this is really good information which I didn't find with search terms like "deep water" or "river crossing".  I found some info about an early militarized version of the FX which claimed 1m deep water could be forded.  I don't think I would even attempt something like that even if there was no significant river current but now that I have read that thread about the fuse I will be very hesitant about crossing any water deep enough to reach the belly of the bike.  It seems there are also concerns about bearing seals not being up to the task of keeping water and dirt out.  That's a little disappointing for a product aimed at off road use.

This reminds me of my toyota tacoma with their claimed off road package.  They brought a breather line for the front differential up high in the engine compartment and then left the rear differential without anything.  Go figure.

Thanks for the welcomes and advice you two!

To answer the question my daily commute for each direction involves 15km logging road and 20km highway. I will be able to charge at work while I'm there.  According to the manufacturer's claims I should be able to do that round trip without charging at work but it is mountainous here and gets cold so I think I will plan for charging at work.  I may add another 10km for quick grocery stop or beer run on the way home.  After returning from work in the evening if there is enough juice in the bike I may opt for exploring the area around the cabin which has a hydro cut and some foot paths between local lakes.  This is why I was considering a fast charger to add back some charge while I make dinner, clean up and exercise my dogs, although, if I can teach them not to bite the wheels, the dog run could be included in an occasional low speed evening trail ride, probably no more than 5km or so.  I had the local dealership quote me Zero's quick charger but I am also open to buying an alternative charger even one from China, I have had good luck so far with electronics I have bought from there.  Still looking into options for that.  Any recommendations from the list are appreciated....so any of you 150 or so who read this thread and didn't post...hello to you, and I'd like to hear from you if you have a favourite aftermaket charger that would work with the FX.