ElectricMotorcycleForum.com
Makes And Models => Zero Motorcycles Forum | 2013+ => Topic started by: Jarrett on January 13, 2019, 08:45:19 PM
-
Hello, newbie here, first post.
I went to the local IMS bike show last weekend and saw Zero motorcycles. Then went and test rode a DS and FX yesterday. I was very impressed with them. Their torque numbers are higher than my Honda Africa Twin CRF1000L and I felt the acceleration is on par with it. I really liked that.
But my Africa Twin has traction control to keep that amount of acceleration in check. Specifically, if I go around a corner and give it too much throttle and the rear tire spins and loses traction, the on-board traction control will kick in and save me from crashing.
So my first thought when looking at the Zero motorcycles is that they have more available torque than my Africa Twin and makes that torque much more quickly than my Africa Twin will, but has no safe guard against spinning the wheel out from underneath me even on a dry, paved corner.
In a quick search about Zero motorcycles, I've already seen discussions of surprise lowsides that experienced riders have encountered that may have been related to this. In fact, I read an unsubstantiated report of the Zero CEO crashing under similar circumstances.
I'm wondering, is this issue real? On every model? And how prevalent is it?
-
I've seen these discussions as well.
My take is it's just like ABS. You don't NEED ABS, but it's a nice safety feature to have.
If you ride a zero you should be aware of the torque and lack of a clutch. You should be aware and practice your throttle control, and perhaps be a bit easier on the throttle in the corners.
If you learn and respect the bike you'll be fine. If you abuse the throttle in a turn, yeah, you're probably going down. But that's true of any bike.
-
I've seen these discussions as well.
My take is it's just like ABS. You don't NEED ABS, but it's a nice safety feature to have.
If you ride a zero you should be aware of the torque and lack of a clutch. You should be aware and practice your throttle control, and perhaps be a bit easier on the throttle in the corners.
If you learn and respect the bike you'll be fine. If you abuse the throttle in a turn, yeah, you're probably going down. But that's true of any bike.
Agreed.... It all depends on your skill set....
-
If you abuse the throttle in a turn, yeah, you're probably going down. But that's true of any bike.
Is it though?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu2zW6PJQ_o
-
Bikes don't crash people. People crash bikes.
I am among those experienced riders that have had a surprise lowside on a Zero. I don't blame lack of traction control, though. It was my fault.
-
Hello, newbie here, first post.
Welcome (insert little waiving guy here)
I'm wondering, is this issue real? On every model? And how prevalent is it?
I can only speak of my 2016 DSR.
Yes it's very prone to unintentionally spinning the rear wheel.
I've done it about 6 times in about 24k miles/20 months.
I'll make a guess & say all incidents occurred in the first 6 months/8k miles. The first occurred on the way home from picking it up.
Fortunately I managed to keep the bike up each time.
I'm a reasonably experienced rider so that helped quite a bit.
I made it through the learning curve relatively Ok but others mileage/mishaps will vary.
Is traction control nessecary?
Depends on ones skill set & tolerance to exposure.
Also limited in the availability of technology.
If you can afford to wait (time more so then $$), technology will catch up to your desires..... http://electricmotorcycleforum.com/boards/index.php?topic=8551.0 (http://electricmotorcycleforum.com/boards/index.php?topic=8551.0)
Edit: I forgot to mention that I feel that the stock rear tire (trials type/squared profile) contributed to the loss of rear tire traction.
The tires were changed to a more rounded profile @ approx 4 months/5k miles.
-
I am among those experienced riders that have had a surprise lowside on a Zero.
What bike? What happened?
-
What bike? What happened?
[/quote]
http://electricmotorcycleforum.com/boards/index.php?topic=6059.msg45902#msg45902
Uncrated my 2016 FXS in my driveway. Rode to the stop sign. Turned right. Opened up throttle all the way while coming out of the turn. Rear wheel spun out from under me. A quarter second later, I figured out what happened, but by that time my bike and I were on the ground. Learned my lesson and hasn't happened again in the past 2.5 years.
-
Often, people get what they deserve.
Jarett, don't ride a bike if your brain cannot control your right wrist.
-
Zero provides a class for parkour skills to stick the highside landing.
-
Here’s some perspective for the longevity and sides of this argument:
- I’ve fishtailed on even my first Zero, a 2013 DS, while riding on wet pavement with gravel or leaves on it. There are threads from that year about the topic.
- The wheel does spin up too quickly once traction is lost.
- In my experience, fishtailing on a Zero is readily recoverable by keeping a light touch on the throttle and easing off while putting weight on the pegs to restabilize.
- I handle my DSR entirely in sport / 100% torque mode now, with very low but not 0% regen level at idle.
Yes, test riders and new owners do lowside and sometimes worse on Zero bikes from blipping the throttle. I think Zero has had a very sound economic reason for five years to at least limit wheel spin up.
True traction control for electric motorcycles involves a unique R&D cycle for whatever powertrain they’ve implemented. It’s my understanding that Energica is still solving this problem for its models which are much more powerful than Zero’s models.
Zero’s controller vendor is Sevcon who mostly make money on forklifts and light industrial trucks. It does have a traction control feature but it’s extremely limited, more suitable for slow movement on smooth concrete than high speed motorcycling.
Zero’s new SR/F platform does seem to address this flaw. I’m sure the engineers are no slouches and knew how to solve it and just couldn’t justify the systems rework expenses without probably ditching the vendor or something similarly drastic.
But I do believe that the existing Zero models deserve a lower wheel spin up rate limit for the stock modes. I haven’t figured out any justification for the current limit other than that it precludes a burnout.
Zero wheel spin up is scary in a way that a traditional combustion engine cannot achieve. It is manageable, but it’s a liability.
-
Same here. I had 2/3 bad experiences like this, until I changed for better tires. Agree traction control would be a good addition, especially with such high torque engines. But Keeping the price low and the technology as simple and reliable as possible should also be important goals !
Hello, newbie here, first post.
Welcome (insert little waiving guy here)
I'm wondering, is this issue real? On every model? And how prevalent is it?
I can only speak of my 2016 DSR.
Yes it's very prone to unintentionally spinning the rear wheel.
I've done it about 6 times in about 24k miles/20 months.
I'll make a guess & say all incidents occurred in the first 6 months/8k miles. The first occurred on the way home from picking it up.
Fortunately I managed to keep the bike up each time.
I'm a reasonably experienced rider so that helped quite a bit.
I made it through the learning curve relatively Ok but others mileage/mishaps will vary.
Is traction control nessecary?
Depends on ones skill set & tolerance to exposure.
Also limited in the availability of technology.
If you can afford to wait (time more so then $$), technology will catch up to your desires..... http://electricmotorcycleforum.com/boards/index.php?topic=8551.0 (http://electricmotorcycleforum.com/boards/index.php?topic=8551.0)
Edit: I forgot to mention that I feel that the stock rear tire (trials type/squared profile) contributed to the loss of rear tire traction.
The tires were changed to a more rounded profile @ approx 4 months/5k miles.
-
After now having ridden the DS, two different SR/F's and putting 2500+ miles on a FX and DSR, I think I can answer my own question.
Are Zero Motorcycles Crash Prone Due to Lack of Traction Control?
No.
-
Vehicles without stability / traction control including cars, motorcycles and other are regularly crashed by incompetent users because skill is required.
Electric gives you a high gear and a lot of torque, which makes a bad situation worse but isn't a problem on a Zero if you have skills. That's because the bikes aren't very powerful and have a rather lazy throttle ramp even on sport.
-
What I see very often is that people forget about the gear multiplying effect on torque that ICEs have. They compare the torque directly out of the motor, which does not make any sense.
I don't know the exact numbers for the Africa Twin, but a friend's BMW has a gear multiplyer of 2.7 in first gear and still 1.5 in sixth gear. For the Afrca Twin with a torque of 98Nm that would mean a whooping effective torque of 265 Nm in first gear and 147 Nm in sixth gear. So, the 146 Nm of the SR is not really "much higher" at all.
Yes, you need to have the right RPM for the ICE to get the max torque, but with 265 Nm there is a lot of room, if you are not in optimal RPM. And don't forget that the ZERO SEVCON does only give you the max torque when running over 30mph. From the start (0 mph) the max torque is much lower.
Anyway, yeah, if you used to ICEs the different power curves and torque availability might give you a problem in an unexected moment, but that has nothing to do with the often falsely quoted "high torque of electic motorcycles".
-
I have to admit, I've been disappointed with the acceleration of my DSR. I figured with "116 ft-lbs of torque" it would be much quicker than ICE bikes with say 80 ft-lbs. of torque, but it's not.
-
I have to admit, I've been disappointed with the acceleration of my DSR. I figured with "116 ft-lbs of torque" it would be much quicker than ICE bikes with say 80 ft-lbs. of torque, but it's not.
Read my post above. Your "ICE bikes with say 80 ft-lbs. of torque" do not have 80 ft-lbs. You must multiply that value with the gear multiplication factor. And then it is much higher. No wonder, the DSR does disappoint you then...
-
I have to admit, I've been disappointed with the acceleration of my DSR. I figured with "116 ft-lbs of torque" it would be much quicker than ICE bikes with say 80 ft-lbs. of torque, but it's not.
Read my post above. Your "ICE bikes with say 80 ft-lbs. of torque" do not have 80 ft-lbs. You must multiply that value with the gear multiplication factor. And then it is much higher. No wonder, the DSR does disappoint you then...
I guess this quote,from Zeros website is a complete lie?
"The Zero DS delivers silent stump-pulling torque, churning up to an outrageous 116 ft-lb—more than any fuel-burning production literbike. Twist the throttle. With this stealth force hurling you forward, you’ll easily leave gas bikes behind"
I admit the zero torque is softened at take-off or we wouldn't be able to control the bike at lower speeds. If I want better excelleration, all I need to do is lose 50 pounds.
Btw, does Zero measure that torque at the motor or at the rear wheel?
Kinda makes me wish there was a gearbox and clutch. It would accelerate faster and get better highway range in top gear imo.
-
I guess this quote,from Zeros website is a complete lie?
It's technically not a lie, just misleading advertising. It suggests that because the DSR has more claimed torque than gas liter bikes, then it will leave them behind easily. It doesn't technically say that, but it certainly implies it.
This would probably be more accurate:
The Zero DS delivers silent stump-pulling torque(as long as it is a little stump), churning up to an outrageous 116 ft-lb—more than any fuel-burning production literbike (even though those bikes are actually quicker than the DSR when ridden by someone that knows what they are doing).
Twist the throttle. With this stealth force hurling you forward, you’ll easily leave (most less than 600cc) gas bikes behind (as long as you are in Sport mode at the time and well above 50% of charge and are not in Thermal Protection Mode already and the other rider isn't really good at drag racing, even still they will likely pass you when you near 90 mph as that's where the DSR starts to peter out)
-
I guess this quote,from Zeros website is a complete lie?
It's technically not a lie, just misleading advertising. It suggests that because the DSR has more claimed torque than gas liter bikes, then it will leave them behind easily. It doesn't technically say that, but it certainly implies it.
This would probably be more accurate:
The Zero DS delivers silent stump-pulling torque(as long as it is a little stump), churning up to an outrageous 116 ft-lb—more than any fuel-burning production literbike (even though those bikes are actually quicker than the DSR when ridden by someone that knows what they are doing).
Twist the throttle. With this stealth force hurling you forward, you’ll easily leave (most less than 600cc) gas bikes behind (as long as you are in Sport mode at the time and well above 50% of charge and are not in Thermal Protection Mode already and the other rider isn't really good at drag racing, even still they will likely pass you when you near 90 mph as that's where the DSR starts to peter out)
Hahaha! Well put!
Accept most 600cc sport bikes will beat you to 30mph if they have a good launch and because Zeros full torque supposedly doesn't kick-in until you hit 30mph.
-
lol, yep. "make you are you going at least 30 mph before engaging with the ICE bike" :D
-
lol, yep. "make you are you going at least 30 mph before engaging with the ICE bike" :D
In a roll-on, I think zero will leave em behind while they're looking for the right gear.
-
"also, make sure they don't expect the race to occur" :)
-
the ZERO SEVCON does only give you the max torque when running over 30mph. From the start (0 mph) the max torque is much lower.
This extraordinary claim is bullshit. The take-off is neutered but all the torque is at the bottom. At 30MPH my FXS was beyond the fattest torque even on stock gearing.
-
It's different on the other models. My DSR is sleepy til 30.
-
Back to the OP:
Any/Every moto is more crash prone without TC, ranging from a lot to just barely. The electrics are on the more likely to crash end of the spectrum.
-
Zero Motorcycles are crash prone due to a number of reasons, not the least of which is piss-poor dealer training and bad design. There's also rider error. The statistics we've been shown suggest exponentially greater risk on a Zero as compared to a conventional petrol bike. Just search for Zeros on auction site and run the numbers against actual sales <1000 annually.
-
I like data, let's see those statistics.
-
I like data, let's see those statistics.
That's a bot. He doesn't have anything :)
-
Ahem... my topic reply seems to have gone a bit wild so I'll have to split it... [Part 1 of 2]
I think you're still focusing on the torque at the front sprocket and forgetting that final drive ratio and tyre circumference have a major part to play.
In fact the thrust at the back wheel is a more useful figure; never quoted by manufacturers, never given as part of a dyno test and seldom calculated. I'd love to see thrust versus rpm charted in each gear for piston bikes so we could compare that to EVs. By the time you've got to the thrust figures, much more has been accounted for; torque conversion from transmissions, sprocket sizes, wheel sizes and even tyre depth. Not to mention powertrain losses which can be very significant on piston powered bikes, especially when torque is quoted at the crankshaft. We consistently forget all the meshed gears, drag from oil and water pumps, power lost in the chain, the condition of the chain and so on. Those losses often seem to be around 15% on piston bikes from the dyno tests I've seen. That's with new bikes in top condition and nice clean chains. There is only a belt to consider on a Zero which I believe saps no more than 2%.
I'm also pretty confident that a brushless AC motor will maintain its performance with age and use. A piston engine with 60,000 miles of use that needs a major service (spark plugs, air filter, valve adjustments, oil and filter), may not be producing the manufacturers quoted figures.
[Short break]
I've just made myself a cup of tea and during a short break from writing this post I've realised that thrust, whilst nice to know, still isn't the metric we need! G-force measured on the road with stock tyres and plotted against speed has to be the ultimate metric we should be demanding. It isn't difficult to measure these days and would take into account all the other factors between thrust and power at the back wheel and actually making progress. These other forgotten factors can be extremely significant in determining acceleration: rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag and of course the weight of the machine and rider. This might be less popular with bike reviewers as it's difficult to account for all the different sizes and shapes we come in.
So why do we almost never hear about g-force? I think it's for the following reasons:
1. G-force is usually a small number and therefore not very exciting: 0.7G at 30mph doesn't sound as impressive as 200bhp at 12,500 rpm (the latter figures only occurring in 1st gear at about 90mph on a modern sportsbike and for a split second at the crank).
2. G-force strips away all the bullshit, which marketing departments love to apply in layers to deceive us all.
3. It's much easier to quote manufacturers figures than to conduct independent testing. Even if it just means setting up a data logger on a bike, it probably requires more effort and expertise than most reviewers have the time for.
4. Everyone has been brainwashed into worshipping horsepower.
-
[Part 2 of 2]
In addition to the points I've already made, here are some compelling reasons to start demanding g-force figures from our favourite bike reviewers:
1. G-force is actually a term that most of the general public can relate to. Have you ever been in a rollercoaster or simply just jumped off a wall? 1G is an extremely effective way of getting fast very quickly!
2. G-force can easily be made more interesting by plotting the results on a graph against other well-known bikes, either in the same category or otherwise, or both! This would reveal a lot about different gear ratios, aerodynamic efficiency, engine or motor characteristics, weight and so on.
3. I think most readers would happily adjust the figures for themselves if told the rider's weight, height and body shape. Not in a complicated way; just in terms of thinking that the test rider was heavier than them, a bit taller and quite stocky, therefore they could expect slightly better figures.
4. G-force directly measures what we often refer to as oomph, which directly relates to the fun factor. G is for Giggles!
5. Modern traction control systems often offer the rider some adjustment as to how intrusive they are. It would be interesting to see how g-force is affected by the different settings.
6. Likewise with power modes.
7. I'd like to see g-force figures for deceleration too. Breaking figures would give an indication of tyre grip and breaking power. It's nice to know how well a bike can slow down. Engine breaking could be shown in different gears too. Some like it, some don't.
8. G-force certainly gets the juices flowing, much like certain parts of the male and female anatomy. It's a bit of fun, if a little naughty... ;-)
9. PC magazines have been comparing various stats using sliders, dials and benchmarks for years. It's a great way of comparing kit and even easier with g-force because 1G will always be 1G. The benchmarks for computers keep changing as each new generation eclipses the last. G-force benchmarks for bikes would last decades and be meaningful to different generations of bikers.
10. G-force could really help to illustrate the appeal of a lightweight 2-stroke bike versus a thumping Harley. How and where they provide the thrills.
11. G-force might help prevent riders from choosing sportsbikes for the road, when they realise they're going to have have more fun with a bike that provides more fun at legal speeds. I've fallen victim to that recently...
I could go on and perhaps you can think of some other compelling reasons? There must be more reasons why we don't see g-force starts very often, although the ones I've mentioned are probably enough...
Anyhow, I've spent much longer on this reply than I anticipated. Perhaps it's worthy off it's own topic. Please let me know your thoughts and I might just rewrite it a little and post it separately if the feedback indicates so.
-
Did you mean to post that in this thread? I don't see what it has to do with the topic.
-
Erm, you do have a good point there Jarrett. I think it was inspired by all the talk of gear ratios earlier on in the thread. However, it is rather off topic so apologies for that.
I'm glad you went for a DSR, by the way. A great choice. Just take extra care in situations that could catch you out, like diesel spills on the road in the dark.
-
Erm, you do have a good point there Jarrett. I think it was inspired by all the talk of gear ratios earlier on in the thread. However, it is rather off topic so apologies for that.
I'm glad you went for a DSR, by the way. A great choice. Just take extra care in situations that could catch you out, like diesel spills on the road in the dark.
No worries, its cool info, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing the connection.
I only just recently encountered my first diesel spill in the dark in a light rain. Thankfully, I was not on my bike but rather in my truck. Even then, it was crazy. ABS and TC were going on instantly and major loss of control. Can't imagine trying to handle that on a SR or DSR.
-
Ok bonkers, you wanted G-forces, tou got it :)
As i am from the mainland of Europe (Netherlands) i am more familiar with the metric system so i'll just use that. Good thing about G-force is that it is irrespective of metric or imperial or other conversions. (not 100% as the G-force is different around the globe but not by much)
lets take the SR and the SR/F (i have the first and the latter is on order :)
SR 2018 :
157 Nm at the motor
final drive ratio 90 : 20 = 4.5 (belt)
Tiresize 140/70/17
Weight : 188 kilos
Rider weight : 80 kilos (could vary among riders ;)
1 G = 9.8 m/s^2
156 Nm * 4.5 = 707 Nm at the wheel (2% loss of the belt not calculated)
tire radius = 0.314 m
707 Nm / 0.314 m = 2250 Newton at the wheel exerted to the ground
2250 N / (188+80 kg) = 8.39 m/s^2
8.39 m/s^2 / 9.8 m/s^2 = 0.86 G
And also a nice thing about G's is that the 0-100 km/hr figure can be calculated. (100 km/h = 27.77 m/s)
the THEORETICAL 0-100 km/h then equals to 27.77 (m/s) / 8.93 (m/s^2) = 3.31 seconds.
mind that this figure is with a lineair acceleration and no wind resistance and no losses in the drivetrain. So faster than that should never be possible.
Same for the SR/F
190 Nm at the motor
final drive ration 90 : 20 = 4.5
Tiresize 180/55/17 (tire radius is the same as a 140/70/17
Weight : 226 kilos (premium version)
Rider weight : 80 kilos (could vary among riders ;)
1 G = 9.8 m/s^2
190 * 4.5 / 0.314 = 2722 Nm
2722 / (226+80) kg = 8.90 m/s^2
So the G-number is 8.90 m/s^2 / 9.8 m/s^2 = 0.91 G
0-100 km/h time is at optimum 3.12 sec
By using lbs for all weights and lbs/ft and tire radius in feet should generate the same numbers for G and 0-100 km/h (0-62 mph)
Weight can have a very profound effect. For example riding with my girl (at 60 kgs) slows the acceleration of the SR from the theoretical 3.3 secs to 4.1 seconds (0.70 G)
All theoretical off course but as bonkers says very comparable.
Final comparison is to a 2010 Street triple that i used to own (Great bike and very similar riding position but noisy as hell :)
torque is around 60 Nm throughout the rev range (very flat from around 2000-10000 rpm)
primary ratio is 85/46, first gear is 34/13 and final drive (chain) is 47/16 totaling a ratio of 14:1 (vs the 4.5:1 of the Zero)
Tire radius is the same at 180/55/17
60 * 14 / 0.314 = 2675 N (almost identical to the SR/F)
weight is 189 kilos + 80 kgs rider (lots less than the SR/F)
acceleration is 10.1 m/s^2 = 1.02 G => 2.75 sec 0-100 kph
Again, totally without consideration for losses in the gearbox and chain etc. which should be a lot higher due to the gears, oil and the chain (15% loss ??)
So while the MOTOR of an electric has loads more torque compared to an ICE bike. The total drive ratio is much smaller and therefore the force exerted to the ground is comparable (600-750 CC bikes) or even lower (litre or greater bike) for an electric motorcycle.
-
That's interesting info, thanks.
Makes me want a Street Triple :)
Which is about 1/2 the cost of a new Zero.
-
hahaha yeah, it was a very nice machine.
But noisy as hell, having to shift (although the quickshifter was very smooth). It literally eats tires (< 5000 km) while the zero does 16.000 km with a much cheaper set.
And the chain maintenance was the most annoying of all. every ride (or every 300 km) having to grease the chain and grease splattering all over the backside (and my backside)
oil changes, valve clearance adjustment etc , ugh.
Although the triple cylinder engine was also smooth as butter, pulling lineair like a zero from as low as 2000 rpm al the way up to 12000 rpm. Very similar to the SR. No waiting at all for it to go up the rev range.
But when i bought my 2018 SR which went a lot further on a charge than my 2014 SR it was done with the Striple. I sold it to have additional funds to justify the purchase of the SR/F and i have no regret about it (I rode it only once on a 3 day gettaway since i got the 2018 SR)
-
That's good to know. I've been considering trading my DSR on a Street Triple.
Need to go test ride one, maybe its not all its cracked up to be.
-
" Just search for Zeros on (salvage) auction site and run the numbers against actual sales <1000 annually. "
Wonder how many crashes are the result of 'learning curve-itis?' Most of salvage Zero wrecks out there are bump-and-dumps rather than high-speed-high-sides; retraining the right wrist after years and years of caressing throttles is not instantaneous.
Traction control may give a rider time to get things under control after unintentionally and unconsciously sending 100HP to the rear wheel, but not if sitting 10 feet behind a garbage truck waiting for a light or some such nonsense. Can you imagine the trouble converted H/D riders will have with their new Livewires? How much sheer determination and self control will be required for a life-long Harley ICE'r to never blip the throttle ever again?
Warren
-
Well... it happened tonight :)
I was in a Harley group ride of all things. Group got caught at a light and split. Light turns green, left hand turn, Sport mode, I give it juice and the back tire starts to step out on me as I make my way around the corner. I chopped the throttle, brought it back in line and hammered it again. A dude on a (I guess faster) Harley wanted to test the DSR at that moment, so I had to get back into it once I straightened up. It waved bye bye to the Harley easily :)
I swear after the last firmware update, this thing is accelerating harder. I spun the rear tire coming out of my garage this morning. It's never done that before. Then I spun it out at that red light tonight. All the sudden, the torque seems to be there now. Not sure why, but I dig it. Whatever the dealer did to it on the last trip was nice and appreciated.
-
Ok bonkers, you wanted G-forces, tou got it :)
As i am from the mainland of Europe (Netherlands) i am more familiar with the metric system so i'll just use that. Good thing about G-force is that it is irrespective of metric or imperial or other conversions. (not 100% as the G-force is different around the globe but not by much)
lets take the SR and the SR/F (i have the first and the latter is on order :)
SR 2018 :
157 Nm at the motor
final drive ratio 90 : 20 = 4.5 (belt)
Tiresize 140/70/17
Weight : 188 kilos
Rider weight : 80 kilos (could vary among riders ;)
1 G = 9.8 m/s^2
156 Nm * 4.5 = 707 Nm at the wheel (2% loss of the belt not calculated)
tire radius = 0.314 m
707 Nm / 0.314 m = 2250 Newton at the wheel exerted to the ground
2250 N / (188+80 kg) = 8.39 m/s^2
8.39 m/s^2 / 9.8 m/s^2 = 0.86 G
And also a nice thing about G's is that the 0-100 km/hr figure can be calculated. (100 km/h = 27.77 m/s)
the THEORETICAL 0-100 km/h then equals to 27.77 (m/s) / 8.93 (m/s^2) = 3.31 seconds.
mind that this figure is with a lineair acceleration and no wind resistance and no losses in the drivetrain. So faster than that should never be possible.
Same for the SR/F
190 Nm at the motor
final drive ration 90 : 20 = 4.5
Tiresize 180/55/17 (tire radius is the same as a 140/70/17
Weight : 226 kilos (premium version)
Rider weight : 80 kilos (could vary among riders ;)
1 G = 9.8 m/s^2
190 * 4.5 / 0.314 = 2722 Nm
2722 / (226+80) kg = 8.90 m/s^2
So the G-number is 8.90 m/s^2 / 9.8 m/s^2 = 0.91 G
0-100 km/h time is at optimum 3.12 sec
By using lbs for all weights and lbs/ft and tire radius in feet should generate the same numbers for G and 0-100 km/h (0-62 mph)
Weight can have a very profound effect. For example riding with my girl (at 60 kgs) slows the acceleration of the SR from the theoretical 3.3 secs to 4.1 seconds (0.70 G)
All theoretical off course but as bonkers says very comparable.
Final comparison is to a 2010 Street triple that i used to own (Great bike and very similar riding position but noisy as hell :)
torque is around 60 Nm throughout the rev range (very flat from around 2000-10000 rpm)
primary ratio is 85/46, first gear is 34/13 and final drive (chain) is 47/16 totaling a ratio of 14:1 (vs the 4.5:1 of the Zero)
Tire radius is the same at 180/55/17
60 * 14 / 0.314 = 2675 N (almost identical to the SR/F)
weight is 189 kilos + 80 kgs rider (lots less than the SR/F)
acceleration is 10.1 m/s^2 = 1.02 G => 2.75 sec 0-100 kph
Again, totally without consideration for losses in the gearbox and chain etc. which should be a lot higher due to the gears, oil and the chain (15% loss ??)
So while the MOTOR of an electric has loads more torque compared to an ICE bike. The total drive ratio is much smaller and therefore the force exerted to the ground is comparable (600-750 CC bikes) or even lower (litre or greater bike) for an electric motorcycle.
Thanks for doing that remmie, very interesting and much appreciated! [emoji4]
-
Well... it happened tonight :)
I was in a Harley group ride of all things. Group got caught at a light and split. Light turns green, left hand turn, Sport mode, I give it juice and the back tire starts to step out on me as I make my way around the corner. I chopped the throttle, brought it back in line and hammered it again. A dude on a (I guess faster) Harley wanted to test the DSR at that moment, so I had to get back into it once I straightened up. It waved bye bye to the Harley easily :)
I swear after the last firmware update, this thing is accelerating harder. I spun the rear tire coming out of my garage this morning. It's never done that before. Then I spun it out at that red light tonight. All the sudden, the torque seems to be there now. Not sure why, but I dig it. Whatever the dealer did to it on the last trip was nice and appreciated.
I haven't done a firmware update yet and I purchased my 2017 dsr used in June 2018, with only 1200 miles on it. Ive heard bad things happening with certain updates, so as long as my bike is working, why fix it?
But if your update improved performance, maybe I'll take a chance with it.
-
...I swear after the last firmware update, this thing is accelerating harder. I spun the rear tire coming out of my garage this morning. It's never done that before. Then I spun it out at that red light tonight. All the sudden, the torque seems to be there now. Not sure why, but I dig it. Whatever the dealer did to it on the last trip was nice and appreciated.
Sport mode? Eco? Custom? Flashing the firmware can have effects on the mode profiles. Custom mode is always overwritten. If you gain access to the MBB the other two profiles can (I think?) be set differently.
-
...I swear after the last firmware update, this thing is accelerating harder. I spun the rear tire coming out of my garage this morning. It's never done that before. Then I spun it out at that red light tonight. All the sudden, the torque seems to be there now. Not sure why, but I dig it. Whatever the dealer did to it on the last trip was nice and appreciated.
Sport mode? Eco? Custom? Flashing the firmware can have effects on the mode profiles. Custom mode is always overwritten. If you gain access to the MBB the other two profiles can (I think?) be set differently.
I had a couple of firmware updates to my 2018 S about a year ago and my custom mode was not affected. :)
-
That's good to know. I've been considering trading my DSR on a Street Triple.
Need to go test ride one, maybe its not all its cracked up to be.
I have a '14 Street Triple and it's going up for sale soon since I got the FX. In 2013 they widened the ratio in 1st gear and it just doesnt seem to have the punch you hear about in older triples. My FX feels faster below 60mph. The motor is fantastic though, very nice torque all through the rev range and like has been said, just buttery smooth even at 2000 rpm. The 765 though.. thats another beast and I want to check one of those out.
-
I have a '14 Street Triple and it's going up for sale soon since I got the FX. My FX feels faster below 60mph.
Oh STREET triple, I was reading SPEED triple for some reason. I guess because I'm looking at the Speed Triple now. It has a sub 3 second 0-60 time. Maybe too much for just having fun on. Going to test ride today, might test ride the Street Triple as well.
-
I went and rode the Street Triple RS, Speed Twin and Speed Triple S today.
I decided to trade my DSR in on a 2019 Speed Triple RS. Hoping to make the swap Saturday.
Also, I did ride the SR/F for a third time today. I really like that bike, it pulls so hard. It's right there with the Speed Triple.
I just wish it would go more than 80 miles a charge. Once they get them up to 250 (real) miles a charge, I'm buying back in.
Til then, my FX will be my Zero.
-
I went and rode the Street Triple RS, Speed Twin and Speed Triple S today.
I decided to trade my DSR in on a 2019 Speed Triple RS. Hoping to make the swap Saturday.
Also, I did ride the SR/F for a third time today. I really like that bike, it pulls so hard. It's right there with the Speed Triple.
I just wish it would go more than 80 miles a charge. Once they get them up to 250 (real) miles a charge, I'm buying back in.
Til then, my FX will be my Zero.
Didn't you just get the 2019 dsr?
-
...
I decided to trade my DSR in on a 2019 Speed Triple RS. Hoping to make the swap Saturday.
...
I have a '14 Speed Triple R I bought NOS a couple years ago. It is a phenomenal bike. I have toured quite a bit on it using SW Motech hard mount soft bags. I also have an SR/F. The SR/F is absolutely quicker and handles better. They are totally different bikes though, despite similar weight and dimensions. At a recent tracK day on my S3 an SR/F absolutely destroyed me, left me like I was standing still. Each bike has its own character, its own function. If you can only afford one bike, and these two are not in the same price range, the S3 might be the better choice if you plan to tour. If you want a hot hooligan though, the SR/F or waiting for the new Ducati Streetfighter V4 would be the better choice.
-
I have a '14 Speed Triple R I bought NOS a couple years ago. It is a phenomenal bike. I have toured quite a bit on it using SW Motech hard mount soft bags. I also have an SR/F. The SR/F is absolutely quicker and handles better. They are totally different bikes though, despite similar weight and dimensions. At a recent tracK day on my S3 an SR/F absolutely destroyed me, left me like I was standing still. Each bike has its own character, its own function. If you can only afford one bike, and these two are not in the same price range, the S3 might be the better choice if you plan to tour. If you want a hot hooligan though, the SR/F or waiting for the new Ducati Streetfighter V4 would be the better choice.
I haven't ridden the 2014 version of the Speed Triple, but I know it has a bit less hp and torque available than the 2019's do. According to the tests, the 2019 Speed Triple is just under 3 secs to 60 mph, with everything I've seen from the SR/F so far, its a fuzz over 3 secs to 60. Based on riding them both yesterday, they seemed to pretty close to each other in terms of performance, at least up to 110 or so when the Speed Triple would just keep on pulling away since the SR/F has a hard stop at 125 mph, when its fully charged. It's just easier to get the accel from the SR/F with no gears, for sure. Although, that quick shifter on the Speed Triple is pretty nice.
Not sure about the handling part. I see test after test where the Speed Triple makes better lap times than higher hp bikes on the track, that seems to be its real strong point. I'd love to see a test where the SR/F is tested in the same way at some point. I would be surprised if it could beat a Speed Triple in that scenario.
The problem with the SR/F in that scenario is heat. It might be quick on that first lap, but a couple of laps in when the heat has gotten to it, thermal protection kicks in and it's going to slow down. Then as the battery drops, performance will be taken away as well. Unlike an ICE bike that gets quicker with less gas, the SR/F will slow down as the charge wears out. It won't perform at 22% the way it does at 92%. I wonder how many sessions a SR/F would last at a track day, I'm guessing not many. Not to mention, riding it that way I'm guessing the battery will last about 60 miles and done. For example, that track day SR/F you're talking about got parked early due to low charge while the ICE bikes kept going all day and some rode home afterward. Something to consider.
One day they are going to solve the battery problem and electric bikes are going to get where you can ride them hard like that all day and not go into thermal protection or peter out in 60 miles. At that point, I'm all in.
-
Didn't you just get the 2019 dsr?
I did. It was a costly mistake for me.
After really enjoying my FX, I thought more would be better and got the DSR. Despite wanting to like the bike, I am just really underwhelmed with its performance. I bought into the Zero marketing of "116 ft-lbs. of torque, more than liter bikes." It's not near a liter bike in performance. Even with what it is, its only at full performance for a few hard throttle pulls before thermal protection mode shuts it down. The limited range and constant thermal protection modes have gotten to me.
The dealer is letting me trade it back in thankfully.
-
Didn't you just get the 2019 dsr?
I did. It was a costly mistake for me.
After really enjoying my FX, I thought more would be better and got the DSR. Despite wanting to like the bike, I am just really underwhelmed with its performance. I bought into the Zero marketing of "116 ft-lbs. of torque, more than liter bikes." It's not near a liter bike in performance. Even with what it is, its only at full performance for a few hard throttle pulls before thermal protection mode shuts it down. The limited range and constant thermal protection modes have gotten to me.
The dealer is letting me trade it back in thankfully.
That's too bad! I really enjoy mine. Since i didnt buy it to your with, it's perfect for my intended use, but it's the only Zero I've ever ridden, so can't compare it to the other models. Good luck with the Triumph.
-
Thanks, I appreciate it.
I'm keeping the FX and fully plan to buy the first Zero that will do 250 miles a charge.
-
Thanks, I appreciate it.
I'm keeping the FX and fully plan to buy the first Zero that will do 250 miles a charge.
I'm waiting for one with L3 that charges faster than 1C. Until than, Zeros not getting anymore money from me.😊