ElectricMotorcycleForum.com

Quote from: Richard230 on July 13, 2016, 04:00:36 AM

One of the features that I liked about the Vectrix that I tested years ago was its back-up "gear".  My recollection is that when at a stop you turned the throttle forward, beyond closed, and the motor would back the scooter up slowly.  A very handy idea. Vectrix had a lot of good ideas.  Too bad they couldn't sell enough product to make a long-term go of it.   

I wish Zero would copy the Vectrix 'throttle'.  The regen and reverse is great.

I think Vetrix has a patent.

Sounds exactly like my 2014 DSP. I've seen a couple of road tests that have the same sound, but I've also seen road tests that don't make the sound.

I'm interested to hear what the result of your investigation is. Did you get any feedback from the dealer?
=:)

 Oh ok, I had formed the impression that you were going to try for a dustbin with no tail. Sorry about that.

I may have overstated the situation. Some people say that the FIM banned dustbins because they didn't look enough like the bikes on the showroom floor. However there are real issues at play, even with wheels to keep the thing pointed in the right direction. I just wanted to point out that there are known dangers to this, which is why I'd love to see a real live actual aerodynamicist employed at Zero to make something that's light, simple and safe. I think it's telling that Mugen and Motoczysz both avoided the dustbin, despite them being allowed under the IoM rules. I think it's completely possible to create a safe streamliner for the road. Just that I don't think a tail-less 1950 dustbin copy is it.

If you're fully aware of the dangers and happy to go ahead, then that's great. I'd be a complete hypocrite if I said not to. I used to design, build and dive my own rebreathers when the only ones available were military, and if they aren't death machines, nothing is.

Motorcycle Tuning: Chassis
By John Robinson
"A pressure drop between one side and the other will encourage the vehicle to move in the direction of the pressure. However this force acts on the side area and if the centre of pressure is behind the centre of gravity then the vehicle starts to behave like a weather vane and turns towards the high pressure side. A well-balanced vehicle will be self correcting because the pressure force will make it move, say, to the left while the couple set up between the centre of pressure and the steering axis will make it steer to the left and roll to the right and the two will largely cancel one another out. If the centre of pressure is far forward or if there is a large side are - as it might be with the 1950s style dustbin fairings, then high pressure on the side will cause unpredictable combinations of roll and yaw, a possibly unstable situation....Racers developed large frontal fairings in the 1950s and were promptly banned because the forward centre of pressure was thought to make them unstable with any amount of yaw"

http://club.motoczysz.com/?p=453
"There are many debates about why the dustbin (AKA “garbage can”) fairing was ruled illegal in ’57. The reasons range from aesthetics to politics but one of the undisputed reasons is that several crashes were attributed to the dustbins and their negative effect on handling- and that was on a 1957 motorcycle! What made the dustbin fairing dangerous for 50’s era racing motorcycles makes it suicidal for 2010 era racing motorcycles.....There is a place for streamlining. Our joint venture with Bajaj has identified aerodynamics as a project priority and one of the best methods to achieving greater efficiency and range in our project. The original C1 spent time in CFD and actual wind tunnel testing, by no means am I opposed to improved aerodynamics. As efficiency is such a component to electric racing it is easy to see why someone may think this is a good idea but I am certain this same person has no modern day racing experience."

I don't want to rain too hard on your parade, but the dustbin fairings you're considering were the exact things that got streamlining banned in motorsport.

They put the centre of pressure ahead of the centre of gravity. Think of throwing a dart backwards. Like that. A string of deaths caused the governing body to say 'enough is enough'. Remember this is a time when they had the IoM as an official round of the GP championship, so they weren't squeamish.

The great thing about the Vetter solution is that the CoP is behind the CoG. He's taken the risks so we don't have to. He even found that adding doors made it too susceptible to cross winds, so we don't need to go down that road. Craig Vetter has done a decade of research on this, we'd be nuts to throw that away and start from a point that we know is dangerous. 

I'd just like to add my own +1 to this.

If I could buy a fairing that I could fit in a couple of hours without cutting up or drilling holes in my bike I'd buy one. It would need to just bolt on. I can't fabricate things to save my life. Well I can, but only if it's something that can be made with cable ties and rubber straps. I think I'd pay three thousand USD for it (but I'd prefer it was cheaper).

I'd like a Vetter/Hershner streamliner, with a Kamm/cutoff tail.

I really need this. I have a regular trip that's just under 800 km return. The DS 11.4 I'm riding can just struggle to make the 140 km between charging opportunities, but I have to ride at a dramatically reduced speed to do it. Being able to make that distance at 100 km/h instead of 50-60 km/h would make a *huge* difference. 4 hours riding with 4 hours charging each way, yes. I could do it there and back in 24 hours rather than staying overnight.

I haven't but gizmag has a pretty detailed (for a magazine article) write up http://www.gizmag.com/go/4430/

Tom you're exactly right.  I think a controllable regen would be great and it could be much stronger than any "automatic" regen.  Personally I'd like it as a left hand lever, but of course preferences would vary.

The ideal would be a frontwheel regen but it would be *very* difficult to implement.  Swigz has done it but it's left no room for batteries!

Perhaps something a little less complex would be good.  Maybe a telescoping shaft from the front wheel to a generator mounted on the top part of the fork or triple clamp.  (so it's unsprung)

Still for the extra weight you could just have some more batteries.

=:)