ElectricMotorcycleForum.com
Makes And Models => Zero Motorcycles Forum | 2013+ => Topic started by: Richard230 on September 29, 2016, 05:05:56 AM
-
The September issue of Motorcycle Consumer News contains a fully-instrumented test of the two-battery pack FXS. The test provides the following hard data: Measured top speed 83 mph; 1/4 mile in 14.90 sec @ 83 mph; 0-60 mph = 5.5 seconds; braking from 60 mph with the ABS on required 141 feet to come to a stop; the speedometer read 65 mph at an actual 64 mph; measured weight was 295 pounds. Power generated was 44 hp and torque reached 70 lb-ft. I have attached a photo of their dyno chart (which is something that you don't see very often in a magazine review of an electric motorcycle).
What they liked: Great torque and smooth power delivery; Simple and efficient; Dead silent.
What they didn't like: Range anxiety; Charge time; Overheating can shut off throttle.
The review was generally positive, but the reviewer had an issue with a complete throttle shutdown when the motor overheated during quarter-mile testing. He reproduced the shutdown on two other FXS models. Also, the editor received a ticket for using an exterior 120V outlet for "EV charging" at his office building. (Apparently that is not permitted at the building where he works and the security staff unplugged his charger after it only charged 4%.) He managed to make it home with the display reading 0% and that was the last time he tried commuting on the FXS. Range is listed as 30 to 70 miles, depending on how fast the bike travels.
I think the article may contain some technical errors as it mentions that the bike uses the IPM motor and that the Charge Tank is available as an accessory. ??? In general the editor liked the FXS, but felt it had a number of limitations for many types of riding.
-
I think the article may contain some technical errors as it mentions that the bike uses the IPM motor and that the Charge Tank is available as an accessory. ???
The FX doesn't use an IPM but the FXS does.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
-
I think the article may contain some technical errors as it mentions that the bike uses the IPM motor and that the Charge Tank is available as an accessory. ???
The FX doesn't use an IPM but the FXS does.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Well then, it appears that the IPM motor still has some overheating issues. ???
-
I think the article may contain some technical errors as it mentions that the bike uses the IPM motor and that the Charge Tank is available as an accessory. ???
The FX doesn't use an IPM but the FXS does.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Well then, it appears that the IPM motor still has some overheating issues. ???
I haven't read the article so I don't know what they actually said about over heating....but if it was just a generic "it over heated" then my bet is on the batteries. With only 2 bricks the FXS batteries will get hot if you push the bike really hard.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
-
It would be interesting to know how much time was given between rounds.
Even on ICE vehicles, you generally wait a while between passes. If they
were the only ones at a rented track, they may have been trying to do back
to back passes.
-
Do you get MCN in the States Richard? I thought it was a British publication.
Thanks for posting. I thought the motor was capable of 54 hp, so I'm surprised they only measured 44 at the back wheel. Let me check...
I stand corrected! I wonder why they would limit the FXS motor to 10 hp less than on the S and DS? Battery limitations from only two bricks perhaps?
It's great to see that the dyno test reveals exactly the same results as Zero's specs. No losses from the drivetrain, which is fantastic!
They have an FXS at Daytona motorcycles (new Zero dealership in London not far from me). I'm sorely tempted to take it for a test ride. I probably shouldn't... ;-)
-
0-60 mph = 5.5 seconds
I noticed this on my FXS.
It's far from the 3.8 seconds zero is claiming.
And it's not like you need a ton of technique (which I assume MCN has), since you don't have to shift gears.
I'm a light weight rider to boot...
I am honestly disappointed with the acceleration, it's not what I was sold.
-
They have an FXS at Daytona motorcycles (new Zero dealership in London not far from me). I'm sorely tempted to take it for a test ride. I probably shouldn't... ;-)
I took that bike for a test ride last Saturday. Very nice. Had a quick back-to-back comparison with their DSR to see how different it would feel power-wise to the SR I'm also considering.
I did have one moment when full throttle at about 75-80mph when there was a bit of a pop and a sudden reduction in power. It felt a bit sudden to be a thermal limit and never happened again.
-
Motorcycle Consumer News is a U.S. subscription-only monthly publication whose claim to fame is that it contains no advertising and is solely supported by subscriber payments. It is similar in concept to Consumer Reports, but only covers motorcycles and related products and subjects.
Here is the overheating quote from the article. After mentioning the thermal cutback when under full throttle at top speed the editor goes on to say: "The real problem was under heavy stress, after repeated quarter-mile attempts, the overheat condition shut the throttle down completely - the speedometer read 0 and the bike would continue decelerating. After coming to a stop, the throttle would not re-engage (with) the fist twist, but releasing it and twisting it again would bring the bike back to life. I was able to reproduce this on two different bikes. I feared an overheat could shut the throttle off at freeway speed, causing the bike to slow, without the benefit of a brake light. This could lead to a dangerous situation for the rider. Thankfully, I didn't experience it outside of abusive testing. Zero recommends a maximum sustained speed of 75 mph and I would encourage riders to consider their usage before choosing a limit." (I assume he was referring to selecting top speed in the custom mode.)
This a new editor of the magazine and I believe this may be the first time he has ever ridden an electric motorcycle before. The previous editor had performed several Zero and Brammo evaluations over the past four or five years and no doubt had more experience with evaluating electric vehicles - including allowing them to cool down a bit between quarter-mile runs. ;)
-
0-60 mph = 5.5 seconds
I noticed this on my FXS.
It's far from the 3.8 seconds zero is claiming.
And it's not like you need a ton of technique (which I assume MCN has), since you don't have to shift gears.
I'm a light weight rider to boot...
I am honestly disappointed with the acceleration, it's not what I was sold.
When testing acceleration times the riders weight is very important (also any accessories that add weight).
If you are going to print a time (fastest time possible) then you use the lightest rider possible. Everyone else does.
I expect the time is correct, its just that most people weight more and get a slower time. Doesn't make Zero's claim wrong.
I think its a pointless exercise to time acceleration because everyone will get a different time.
-
When testing acceleration times the riders weight is very important (also any accessories that add weight).
The rider from Zero for the official MY2016 performance testing weighs less than my petite ex-girlfriend of 162cm.
Hopefully the future model year will perform better. It doesn't have to get better times 0-100kph the just the same published acceleration with a longer and more lumpy rider.
-
0-60 mph = 5.5 seconds
I noticed this on my FXS.
It's far from the 3.8 seconds zero is claiming.
And it's not like you need a ton of technique (which I assume MCN has), since you don't have to shift gears.
I'm a light weight rider to boot...
I am honestly disappointed with the acceleration, it's not what I was sold.
When testing acceleration times the riders weight is very important (also any accessories that add weight).
If you are going to print a time (fastest time possible) then you use the lightest rider possible. Everyone else does.
I expect the time is correct, its just that most people weight more and get a slower time. Doesn't make Zero's claim wrong.
I think its a pointless exercise to time acceleration because everyone will get a different time.
The editor who performed the acceleration tests is 6'-something tall and weighs 190 pounds. Plus, the bike was stock and did not have even a windshield to hide his bulk. So there is that..... ::)
-
That's real life performance ;) These are very close to my stats, and I feel (never measured) my '15 SR is probably at least 1.5 seconds slower than advertised. It would be nice to have the acceleration numbers listed for several ride weights, just like they range have the range listed for several riding situations (city, highway, mixed).
The editor who performed the acceleration tests is 6'-something tall and weighs 190 pounds. Plus, the bike was stock and did not have even a windshield to hide his bulk. So there is that..... ::)
-
There is a good hint about acceleration, when you add 20kg (power tank) the bike goes from 3.3 to 3.9. So if you weight 20kg more than the test rider then you will get 3.9 for 0-100km/h. I think all the information you need is in the specs sheet.
-
Zero has done an amazing job in detailing the range data, it seems to be very accurate.
It's just disappointing to see that the accuracy isn't applied to all the specs.
-
And, unlike range estimates, 0-60mph times are easy to check and repeatable ...
Zero has done an amazing job in detailing the range data, it seems to be very accurate.
It's just disappointing to see that the accuracy isn't applied to all the specs.
-
When I read or hear about not finding the manufacturer's 0-60 times.
I have been surprised how many riders have never shifted with their left hand doing 0-60 or quarter mile.
("Yes" I grew up before speed shifters, and "Yes" I mean grabbing the foot shifter)
So I'll share some aged (and maybe not relevant anymore) drag racing tips, some came from my dad. Some may be heresy.
Preloading drivetrain using brakes and throttle prior to start.
The first few time you try this - it should scare the sh*t out of you. The bike might leave without you.
Holding handbars for dear life to stay on or digging into footpegs?
Using the handlebars to hang on lifts the front.
Lowering your weight to below the drive will lessen lift, lower profile is less drag.
Tucking to avoid drag - legs on seat behind or over tail lights (as speed increases)?
Deep tight tucking - steer by the edge of the track. make every effort to cut drag.
Sure you can't shift with the left... but where in the drag profile is that arm?
Lower profile by compressing suspension with cargo straps.
Pull that front fork down and lock it.
Humidity? Headwind? Temperature? Tire Pressure? Mirrors?
Racing times can also improve by running with less oil... ok that doesn't apply.
How accurate is measurement? Speedo's are optimistic and may have lag.
I'm not saying we can find a missing second.
But until we know optimized technique is in use we should take every shortcomer with a grain of salt.
At the risk being being labelled a Zero Apologist, and it would be an honor to join Terry in the moniker...
The US government doesn't have a standard for how 0-60mph is measured. (unlike MPG)
Lightest rider taking a running start? Could be... the sky is the limit.
(Zero actually has a different rated range in Europe than USA, because these nations measure range differently. Chances are neither is exactly how or where you ride.) (Corrected see below)
So 0-60mph doesn't mean what we think it means, and I'm not surprised we can't get there. Don't obsess with hitting it, but just use to to compare to other's 0-60 times I probably can't hit either.
-
I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Zero's 0-60 times were obtained on their dyno and not on a drag strip. ???
-
(Zero actually has a different rated range in Europe than USA, because these nations measure range differently. Chances are neither is exactly how or where you ride.)
Where do you see that?
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/de/zero-s-specs (http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/de/zero-s-specs)
Shows 317 km in city riding, 158 km in highway 113 km/h (70 mph) riding.
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php (http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php)
Same thing shown on the US site.
-
(Zero actually has a different rated range in Europe than USA, because these nations measure range differently. Chances are neither is exactly how or where you ride.)
Where do you see that?
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/de/zero-s-specs (http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/de/zero-s-specs)
Shows 317 km in city riding, 158 km in highway 113 km/h (70 mph) riding.
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php (http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php)
Same thing shown on the US site.
Different measurement standards for US and Europe - would have a different result in Europe.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1100055_2016-nissan-leaf-range-107-or-155-miles-why-test-cycles-can-be-deceptive (http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1100055_2016-nissan-leaf-range-107-or-155-miles-why-test-cycles-can-be-deceptive)
And the test procedures used by the New European Driving Cycle are both shorter and slower than the EPA's procedures.
The EPA's city test is 31 minutes long, for example, while the European "Urban" test is 13 minutes long.
NEDC's "Extra urban" test takes 6 minutes, 40 seconds; the equivalent EPA highway test is 12 minutes, 45 seconds.
Reflecting differing traffic conditions between centuries-old European cities and sprawling post-war suburbia in the U.S., speeds are different too.
During that 13-minute NEDC urban test, the highest speed attained barely exceeds 30 mph, and that rate is maintained for a mere 12 seconds.
The rest of the test is made up of slow acceleration and deceleration, while more than 2 minutes is spent at a standstill.
By comparison, the EPA's city test occasionally reaches almost 60 mph, while the rest of it is spent accelerating up to 30 mph and then returning to a dead stop--and repeating--for true stop-start driving that's much harder on efficiency.
It's the same with highway testing--not only are the EPA's tests longer, but cars spend much more time at greater speeds.
The basic highway test cycle still only tops out at an unrealistic 60 mph, and averages only 48 mph, so it's not representative of real-world driving today.
The EPA also takes into account extra variability, such as 'High Speed', 'Air Conditioner,'and 'Cold Temperature' tests, to adjust the city and highway efficiency posted on every new car's window sticker to keep it relevant to real-world use.
That all adds up to significant differences between U.S. range ratings for electric cars and those found on identical cars in Europe.
U.S. combined range ratings are generally considered accurate for electric cars operated in temperate climates, where cabin heating isn't required.
-
Zero tests to neither the EPA 5-cycle standard nor the NEDRA standard. They test to the MIC standard (which they helped develop, and the city component is based on the EPA UDDS) and as far as I know report the same numbers everywhere.
-
Zero tests to neither the EPA 5-cycle standard nor the NEDRA standard. They test to the MIC standard (which they helped develop, and the city component is based on the EPA UDDS) and as far as I know report the same numbers everywhere.
Cool thanks. I might have to be reminded a couple times - I've been used to the double standard as status quo for ages.
Point on elusive 0-60mph not having a standard I presume still holds?
-
Preloading drivetrain using brakes and throttle prior to start.
The first few time you try this - it should scare the sh*t out of you. The bike might leave without you.
I really don't know if this is relevant for electric engines. Presumably, this would help in a ICE bike which has very low torque in the low RPM range.
The other problem I have with this is that my FXS already loses traction when I gun it.
Actually the biggest problem is that the early acceleration seems to be very limited and it only really accelerates hard after reaching a certain minimum speed.
It's like at 30 kph the I get full power and that's when the rear wheel breaks loose.
How accurate is measurement? Speedo's are optimistic and may have lag.
I'm not saying we can find a missing second.
But until we know optimized technique is in use we should take every shortcomer with a grain of salt.
The speedo is a good point, it could be way off. Maybe I'm hitting 100 before I realize it.
Only problem I have with all of this is that 400cc scooters seem to be giving me a run for my money...
-
Actually the biggest problem is that the early acceleration seems to be very limited and it only really accelerates hard after reaching a certain minimum speed.
i have the same opinion. it's completely flat if your sitting on the line, then whack it open. it takes a few 10th's to catch, then another couple before it really starts to go. i've messed around with a couple diff techniques yielding varying results, but one thing the book says NOT to do is....pre-load the engine and driveline before launch using the brakes. they say this can cause damage to the motor. not sure what but, if you believes the owners manual i would caution against.
maybe one of the brains can explain the pre-loading problem?
laters,
laramie ;)
-
If you hold the brake and twist the throttle without the bike moving, the motor will experience the maximum current that the controller will throw at it and 100% of that current will turn into heat. We know the motors overheat when ridden hard at high speeds/accelerations and yet in those conditions they drat no more current than when "stalled", only part of that current generates heat (the rest of it generates "motion" and propels you forward), plus there is air cooling from the wind.
When stalled, there is little cooling and all the current turns into heat. So the motor overheats/gets damaged. For a split second, probably not a problem - after all, that's what you do every time you go from a stop. But holding it there with there with the brake for more than a moment is bad.
Plus, I doubt it will generate more current this way vs. just turning the throttle quickly and taking off. You are not building RPM like with a bike with a clutch, so I'm not even sure if you can "pre-load" a Zero this way for a quicker start. Has someone tried?
Actually the biggest problem is that the early acceleration seems to be very limited and it only really accelerates hard after reaching a certain minimum speed.
i have the same opinion. it's completely flat if your sitting on the line, then whack it open. it takes a few 10th's to catch, then another couple before it really starts to go. i've messed around with a couple diff techniques yielding varying results, but one thing the book says NOT to do is....pre-load the engine and driveline before launch using the brakes. they say this can cause damage to the motor. not sure what but, if you believes the owners manual i would caution against.
maybe one of the brains can explain the pre-loading problem?
laters,
laramie ;)
-
I believe that I have pointed to this link before, but, it may shed some light on acceleration times.
http://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/zero-0-60-mph-times/ (http://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/zero-0-60-mph-times/)
-
I believe that I have pointed to this link before, but, it may shed some light on acceleration times.
http://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/zero-0-60-mph-times/ (http://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/zero-0-60-mph-times/)
Am I missing something? Those numbers appear to be identical to the Zero website numbers.
They just copied them over...
-
I believe that I have pointed to this link before, but, it may shed some light on acceleration times.
http://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/zero-0-60-mph-times/ (http://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/zero-0-60-mph-times/)
Am I missing something? Those numbers appear to be identical to the Zero website numbers.
They just copied them over...
I don't think you are missing anything..... ::)
-
Plus, I doubt it will generate more current this way vs. just turning the throttle quickly and taking off. You are not building RPM like with a bike with a clutch, so I'm not even sure if you can "pre-load" a Zero this way for a quicker start. Has someone tried?
Tried "preloading" this afternoon on my FXS. You can see torque build up if you twist the throttle with the brake applied. I don't know that it would have an effect vs just twisting the throttle full open though. With enough throttle application, I could push the front wheel with the brakes applied. I didn't make too many attempts, so maybe there's a technique that could give some small advantage, but as others have pointed out, the initial motor response feels like it's muted until after the bike gets rolling.
If anyone read my previous response where I said I couldn't sense torque developing, I deleted it, since I was mistaken.
-
Listed not as examples of things to try - but listed as things I'm not hearing anyone include in their preparations to optimize their 0-60 attempts.
"Yes" it is bad for the motor.
"Yes" it is potentially dangerous.
"Yes" improvements may be marginal.
"Yes" these are decades old tips.
Simply held intent if it changes shape while accelerating it is wasting energy. That is springs, sinew and even the tension within the chassis. So pre-loading, pre-compressing and locking in place unifies force to the singular task of launching down the road.
Overall you've got to do one more crazy thing than the other guy to be faster.
There is more than just globbing the throttle to 100% and counting the seconds. Maybe there shouldn't be.
Even a properly trained - modern motorcycle drag racer who employs tried and true and iterated methods may still come up short... because we don't know how it was measured to replicate.
I haven't been challenged at the lights in decades.
-
I apologize if the zero to 60 link was just copy and past. I guess they just "collect" posted information.
As far as pre loading the bike, there is little reason to do so on the Zero since the torque is available
from zero rpm. If front brake is used, it may take minimal slack out of belt, and, may compress the front
end a bit but, as far as absolute time, doubtful. The actual "pass" may be improved because of a minute
decrease in time between opening throttle and bike accepting the change. This might improve reaction
time but not really the time / speed. This might help you in the race against the other guy, but not
improve time / speed.
As far as the bike feeling like it doesn't get full acceleration until the bike gets rolling, I believe that
is correct. If I recall, it doesn't get full power until around 30 mph. If the bike wheelies or spins now,
full power from stop would make it worse. Unless you have a slick and wheelie bar, you have to feed
the throttle to just a little less than what it takes to have it spin or wheelie.
Another point from above about shifting with your hand. I have done this but did not notice a difference
in speed, just less control of the bike. If trying to do this from a stop, I am pretty sure that it would actually
cost you in the time that you take to get from launch position on bike to getting your hand to shifter. I would
launch, then, put my left hand on the fork tube to get my left arm a bit more out of the wind ( flat track style ).
When going for a national record, i would press the front caliper to move the pucks away from the disks this
would allow for a minimal difference, but, sometimes that was all that was needed for a better ET. When going
for speed record, I would line up as close to one side of the lane as I could and still be at a good contact area,
then, point the bike at an angle to cross the lane to the other side to add a few feet to the distance traveled by
the end ofthe mph lights.