Print

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

[Crissa]

Thank you so I remain 2-0

So in one, you said they didn't show a charging session, hence they didn't have it (but they did) and in the other you said they needed say, a 250 kWh battery... But they needed half that.

That seems like you were wrong both times.

-Crissa

[princec]

The thing about aero on bikes is it sort of solves a problem that nobody really has... the speed limit for most people most of the time in most of the world is about 70mph, below which aero isn't making a whole lot of difference.

At 70mph, I can feel the wind pushing agsainst me, and that's with a full fairing. Even below 70mph aero makes a difference.
That wind blast is wasted energy that I'd love to avoid.

The wind pushes against something no matter what you do (I solved this particular problem with an MRA sport screen and spoiler - now I barely feel it). The important thing with aero is what happens right after it hits the thing that is in the way. Nothing any of these designs does helps that air go past the thing smoothly and efficiently. As I say... about the only design in the last 30 years that has had any serious nod to aero was the ZZR1100, which managed just shy of 180mph on just 138bhp. Kawasaki have a history of designing for this sort of thing as they build ships and the like where a 0.1% reduction in drag equals savings of thousands in fuel costs.

Cas

[NEW2elec]

Thank you so I remain 2-0

So in one, you said they didn't show a charging session, hence they didn't have it (but they did) and in the other you said they needed say, a 250 kWh battery... But they needed half that.

That seems like you were wrong both times.

-Crissa

LOL

No he never claimed they had a 250kWh pack.  I'll give him that.
It all started with Damon's range claims of course.  They said they had the same battery pack size as the Energica + bikes, 21kWhs, but could go farther.
I compared the range of a Tesla 100 kWh pack which is like 410 miles to the Lucid Air Dream with a 113 kWh pack but has a now confirmed EPA range of 520 miles.  The CEO of Lucid listed several factors that allowed them to achieve this.  He called it smart range.
Getting more range by means other than just bigger and bigger batteries.

Motor Trend did a Beverly Hills to SF trip so 470 miles for sure with the range estimator showing like 60 miles left.
That's when Morgan went off the tracks a little and claimed maybe they had a rigged larger battery (over the 113kWh claim) car for the media test.
I pointed out there is no reason to say you have a smaller pack than you really do.  I threw out the 250kWh number to show if they needed a much bigger battery to go 520 miles just say it.  No shame, no problem.  The win is in going the farthest without charging and as of right now they have that title for their class.

Because Rivian has/had been delayed he was also calling BS that they would ever come to market.  I told him to tell Amazon to cancel their 100,000 truck order because it was a fake company but I don't know that he ever did.

Now for those who have not kept up with our ongoing Damon debate (you are probably better off for it) I view the exchanges between myself and Morgan as good natured jabs at different opinions.  I hope he feels the same.

Edit:
Here is a video From the YT channel E for Electric confirming both the Lucid and Rivian news.  Saves me some time.

[Fran K]

Richard230 sure got the Alta thing right when they had a price drop.

What is the difference between a thread hijack and a thread derail?

What about the flying thing with the camera that was used to make the picture portion of the video.  I seem to remember those things called drones though they are sort of remote control are at the forefront of battery new best stuff usage.

Got any bikes to ride without a full face helmet and squishy objects stuffed in the ears?

[MVetter]

Every other day the media will hype the next "Tesla killer". Yes, yes, the previous 50 reports they showcased didn't end up being anything... but THIS ONE. Now this one is something special!

[NEW2elec]

Nope nope nope, this has nothing to do with killing Tesla or not.  Lucid might make 100 cars and close up shop, that part doesn't matter.

This was always about one company finding ways to get more range per kWh of battery.
They got over 110 more miles from just 13 more kWh of battery than a Tesla P100D.

That shows it is at least possible for Damon to get better range than Energica with the same battery size.

You do get points for having good taste in TV shows though.

And even though you lost your left hand to that seal you're going to be all right.

[MVetter]

Nope nope nope, this has nothing to do with killing Tesla or not.  Lucid might make 100 cars and close up shop, that part doesn't matter.

This was always about one company finding ways to get more range per kWh of battery.
They got over 110 more miles from just 13 more kWh of battery than a Tesla P100D.

That shows it is at least possible for Damon to get better range than Energica with the same battery size.

To me that was never the question. It's patently obvious that there are lots of ways to improve range without touching the battery. My problem with the Damon bikes is they make all the claims when *they have no bike*. They don't have anything. And they trash talk the other manufacturers. I have problems with that behavior.

[NEW2elec]

Ok well for me it's always been about the most range.  If the bike had no differences to a Zero SR but could go 200 miles highway mixed riding that would be enough for me to want it.

I have no, none, zip, nadda, charging stations where I want to ride so it's all range for me.
All the extra perks and features are just gravy.

Anyway I'll PM you with a few other questions.

[gregj]

" It's patently obvious that there are lots of ways to improve range without touching the battery". Sooooooo true
I have been saying this as long as I have been interested in motorcycles. And that's a long time.
Fact : Motorcycles basically have the aero on a spikey brick. Anything that cleans up the flow around the complete motorcycle AND rider will assist top speed and range.
 Why do manufacturers insist on producing emotorcycles that go out of their way to create a parachute, on something that needs to have as little drag as possible if it is to get any range.
If you choose a "retro" or "cafe racer" expect compromised aero efficiency, and as a result, decreased range and reduced top speed compared to a properly faired bike. Surely the advent of emotorcycles and a Tabula Rasa moment to rethink the motorcycles design should be enough to get us thinking efficiency, rather than back to the late 60's early 70's.
Mvetter you have an ally. ( Especially if you are who I think you are.)

[Crissa]

Cafe racers have reduced frontal section.

Not saying much, but it's better than most upright bikes.

-Crissa

[Demoni]

The major hurdle for motorcycle designers improving a bikes coefficient of drag (Cd) is a high Reynolds number (Re). A high Re is a result of the turbulence a motorcycle creates when it punches a hole in the air. By comparison cars are slippery and keep the air they are pushing through smooth and attached (laminar flow). Because cars are longer than motorcycles they have more time to create clean airflow over and around.

This is a perfect example of a a motorcycle modified for improved Cd and Re. The front fairing provides a smoother shape for the air, in addition the rear box allows air going around the rider a smoother transition away from the bike creating less turbulence.



For reference the streamlined EVA above is running a 13.4 kWh battery pack and obtains similar range at 65mph to a stock EVA 21.5kWh bike. That's a substantial improvement of 60% to the overall range of the bike. There are drawbacks to this level of streamlining however including: very little airflow (cooling) to the battery, motor, radiator and rider plus a higher cross sectional area, that can cause issues in side winds.

Most motorcycle customers would not accept the design changes needed to improve Cd to the above level. I strongly feel there is a middle ground that could net 10-20% better efficiency especially when it comes to EV bikes that require less airflow for cooling vs ICE motos.

[princec]

Indeed, once again I mention the ZZR1100, which back in the 90s managed 180mph from just 138bhp at the rear wheel, and an easy 60mpg (UK) if you actually stuck to speed limits. It wasn't an outlandish shape (in fact still one of the best looking bikes of the 90s methinks).

The other, probably more reasonable alternative, is to accept that the days of high speed motorcycling are past us now, and the reality of more rigorously enforced speed limits, social unacceptability of speeding, pointless engineering wankery to get power nobody needs at the expense of efficiency and indeed expense, etc, all point us in the direction of just Going About The Place More Slowly These Days. Riding under 70mph, aero doesn't have huge benefits but comes with all the same weight, cost, plastic, expense, tears after minor car-park tumbles, etc. Market watching says so too: everyone's buying naked bikes now (because of course, adventure bikes went off on a massive wank and became ludicrously overpriced, overweight, overcomplex, and overpowered). Rinse, repeat.

Cas

[Richard230]

The major hurdle for motorcycle designers improving a bikes coefficient of drag (Cd) is a high Reynolds number (Re). A high Re is a result of the turbulence a motorcycle creates when it punches a hole in the air. By comparison cars are slippery and keep the air they are pushing through smooth and attached (laminar flow). Because cars are longer than motorcycles they have more time to create clean airflow over and around.

This is a perfect example of a a motorcycle modified for improved Cd and Re. The front fairing provides a smoother shape for the air, in addition the rear box allows air going around the rider a smoother transition away from the bike creating less turbulence.



For reference the streamlined EVA above is running a 13.4 kWh battery pack and obtains similar range at 65mph to a stock EVA 21.5kWh bike. That's a substantial improvement of 60% to the overall range of the bike. There are drawbacks to this level of streamlining however including: very little airflow (cooling) to the battery, motor, radiator and rider plus a higher cross sectional area, that can cause issues in side winds.

Most motorcycle customers would not accept the design changes needed to improve Cd to the above level. I strongly feel there is a middle ground that could net 10-20% better efficiency especially when it comes to EV bikes that require less airflow for cooling vs ICE motos.

Looks like a 1950's "dust bin" to me.   

[NEW2elec]

That's the bike from Morgan's Disney Land to Reno run.  Morgan thought he would make it first but didn't turn out that way.


Cas, British cites may have control over everyone's lives around them but I promise the whole world isn't that way.

[princec]

Similar situation in mainland Europe now too... cameras and radars everywhere But I still seem to be having the same amount of fun as I did 20 years ago so maybe speed wasn't all it was cracked up to be...

Cas