ElectricMotorcycleForum.com
Makes And Models => Zero Motorcycles Forum | 2013+ => Topic started by: baumisch on April 18, 2013, 08:32:01 PM
-
I absolutely don't get it - why does it take ages for someone somewhere on this planet to compare these 2 most promising mass-market e-bikes against each other. I am a big Zero fan - I fear that Brammo might take the performance crown for 2013 - but I want the facts ...
-
I have a suspicion that neither company wants a direct comparison of their bikes right now.
When they supply the test bikes to the magazines or other testing organizations that would publish their findings, one would likely be said to be better than the other - resulting in reduced sales of the "lesser" model. Plus, both companies are likely assembling bikes for sale to customers as fast as possible and taking a couple of production bikes out of the sales line would not be fair to customers and retail dealers that are currently waiting for the 2013 models to arrive. Finally, the magazine testers tend to trash the bikes and if they break will be very critical about both the brand and the technology. That is a risk that both Brammo and especially Zero may not want to take until sales start declining sometime this summer.
Can you imagine what would happen if one of the magazines got a lemon like the one that DesignerDan bought? That would not be good for the company.
In the case of the Empulse, there are likely people that have been on their waiting list for a couple of years now and I would like to think that shipping the bikes out to the long-suffering pre-order customers are a higher priority than giving a new production bike to the magazines to destroy.
So I suspect that we will all have to wait until sometime this summer before seeing a test of either or both new models - much less a direct comparison of the two. :(
-
I wonder if there's anyone near Portland with a 2013 :)
-
https://www.facebook.com/video/embed?video_id=10200435003710542 (https://www.facebook.com/video/embed?video_id=10200435003710542)
First Public Dyno of a 2013 S (That I know of) .. any Brammo Dyno pulls yet?
At the end of the video you can see it did just over 58hp according to their dyno.
-ryan
-
And how do we know that's a stock Zero without controller tweaks?
According to what I've heard (and with my experience with them), Brammo Dyno's every bike.
Wonder if there's a Dyno here in Portland I could throw the bike on.
-
I don't know about the 2013 bikes, but the 29 hp claimed by Zero for the 2012 street models seems to be right on when the magazines have tested the bikes on their own rear wheel dynos. My recollection is that both Bike and Motorcycle Consumer News achieved 29 hp on their dynos.
-
I as a 2013 Zero DS owner don't need it to be the fastest or strongest on the dyno. I need a bike that's reliable and fun and pays itself off with reliable continuous usage. It's also a huge factor that I have a dealer to turn to in case anything goes wrong. I'd love a Brammo in principle, but it's just not available in any sense I care about.
-
Hi Biff thanks for this nice link,
hope the demo 2013 S of my dealer will arrive soon so I can witness this performance personally ;D
-
In @Pinkyracr's last piece for Gas2 she was told the waiting list for the press bikes was really long. But I'm with what Richard230 said. I think Zero is straight out making bikes, and I don't think things have slowed down much for Brammo either as we are still waiting to see the standard Empulse hit the street. I suspect it is simply availability. Going with what Richard said, they may want to fill all their orders first and then send them off for testing. Also think about how late into the year we get reviews in the major rags. I doubt these things are at the top of the list. And after some of the articles I've read I'd be darn trepidatious handing free bikes over to these guys, or me. ;D
But you're not the only one. The Empulse v Zero S spec sheet comparison I wrote a few months back has steady traffic every day. It's the second most popular post of all time and the most popular for the year so far, for my site.
-
I'm still pissed that Jay Leno got his first Zero before me, when I had been on the waiting list a long time ;)
Just kidding.
Trikester
-
I was not exclusively talking about some official media testing both machines - I am a big newmedia fan and I still hope some blogger/ev-enthusiast takes the leap here and does a nice review and comparrison of both ...
-
And how do we know that's a stock Zero without controller tweaks?
We don't, but that's pretty close to Zero's published specs (55 hp).
I would like to see what a Sevcon 6 would do on one.
-
54hp:
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php (http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php)
4+ horsepower isn't trivial ...
Not sure what a Gen4 Size 6 would do... it really boils down to "can that motor take it". I'd be interested to see if the motor can cool itself effectively at that higher power/current.
-
Dyno pulls are fun but hard to calibrate & compare accurately. Ex: is that 58 HP measured at the rear wheel, with all the usual dyno temp/atmospheric compensation turned off?
58 rear wheel HP is probably more like 63 HP at the motor output shaft, which is way more than specified. 54 HP at the motor is already incredible with the size 4 controller..
Let's see the bikes at the dragstrip and the track!
-
54hp:
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php (http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php)
4+ horsepower isn't trivial ...
Not sure what a Gen4 Size 6 would do... it really boils down to "can that motor take it". I'd be interested to see if the motor can cool itself effectively at that higher power/current.
Well they haven't admitted it but Hollywood Electrics 2013 custom 'Super S' is almost certainly using a size 6 controller.
(http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/903003_10150289847864963_1739341706_o.jpg)
-
I own a Zero 2012S and have ridden the Empulse a couple times, but I have not yet ridden a 2013S. I really enjoyed the Empulse a lot and felt it handled better and was more comfortable than the Ducati Monster I test rode. I have sat on the 2013 Zero S and just couldn't get a emotional attachment to the looks which would make it difficult to buy for me (I did not fall in love with the looks of my 2012 Zero but there was nothing last year I could buy that was as fun as that Zero and ran on electricity). Things about my 2012 Zero I liked more than the Empulse were the light weigh, belt drive, almost total silence running, ability to plug into any wall socket and smother throttle roll off. Things I liked more about the Empulse than my own Zero were the way it looks, ergos, power and the ability to plug into any of those free J17 stations all over the place out here. If you are going to spend money on either of them I would make sure to take both out for a test ride first then listen to your own heart strings.
-
http://www.motorcycle.com/shoot-outs/2013-brammo-empulse-r-vs-zero-s-zf114-91574.html (http://www.motorcycle.com/shoot-outs/2013-brammo-empulse-r-vs-zero-s-zf114-91574.html)
-
Thanks for the link to the shoot-out, BSDThw. It is just about what I expected from the two bike's specifications and from previous press and rider reports.
-
Nice Review.
I think that the Zero wins for being what an electric motorcycle can be rather than trying to pretend to be an ICE motorcycle. I would like to own both of them but I spent my money on a Zero.
My 2 cents.
-
Quite a good comparison. Video review is worth a look too.
2013 Brammo Empulse R vs Zero S ZF11.4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akgNW74qOYo#ws)
In the video they claim 50 miles of abuse (186 Wh/mile @ the pack) on the Brammo and 62.5 miles (160 Wh/mile @ the pack) on the Zero. Similar riding conditions .. best range comparison to date.
Per the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=akgNW74qOYo#t=301s):
We ran them in not the most optimal circumstances. We drag raced them, top-gear roll-ons, we were out in the canyons all day.
Assuming the ZF8.5 gets 75% of the range, that's 47 miles on the smaller Zero. Makes it a little more efficient.
“The Empulse left the Zero for dead in an acceleration contest from a complete stop, as the torque-multiplication benefits from its gearbox makes the Empulse the drag racer’s choice,†says EiC, Kevin Duke. “Yet, to declare the Brammo the clear winner in terms of power isn’t telling the whole story. A roll-on contest at 55 mph (with the Empulse in fourth gear) showed the Zero has a slight edge.â€
Zero S ZF11.4 vs Empulse R is a pretty easy story to tell. Want a sportsbike and premium design? Empulse R is your bike: it goes faster and charges faster in most conditions. Want tons of range, easy operation and maintenance? Zero S is your bike.
I'm looking forward to another shootout in the future - Zero S ZF8.5 vs Empulse E1 (non-R). The bikes are a little more similar so conclusions will be a bit harder to tease out. ZF8.5 should have very close to Empulse E1 range, but also drops some weight and may pick up some acceleration. Empulse E1 drops the carbon farkles and has less sport-focused components. Both are $2000 less expensive than their big brothers; the price gap is consistent.
-
Thank god we finally have a comparisson - still I am missing the drag-video where you see the "The Empulse left the Zero for dead in an acceleration" thing clearly ...
I drove the 11.4 Zero last weekend here in Germany and I was beaten by my friends Ninja 600 so easily at the trafficlight-sprint :( I just hate the off-the-line performance of Zero, the new 2013 is a blast in any ways except the off-the-line thing ...
But anyway - I'm still on 2012 model, so I'll wait for a used 2014 bike in a few years and put more miles on my 2012-zf9 until then ...
-
Gas bikes have a pretty big advantage by dumping the clutch. Even if the Zero and the Brammo bikes didn't restrict at 0 rpm - I wonder if this is a Sevcon thing? - Gas bikes (and cars) produce > 100% torque for a second or so until the clutch locks.
If you get a chance to retest, try doing a rollon acceleration test at 10, 30, 50, 70 mph.
-
I wonder if this is a Sevcon thing?
In my understanding it is caused by the PM-Motor.
The motor type has a dependency between rotation and voltage => you will always start with 0V and reach your top voltage at the nominative rotation. More rotation will need field weakening (it starts at ~3500RPM)
If you start you will have 420A but ~0V(0KW) .. 5V(2.1KW) ... 10V(4.2KW) .. 15V(6.3KW) ... => So the 21KW at a 2012 S/DS will only be at ~3500RMP.
I make a simple picture in my head: The motor is also a generator and if propelled it produce a voltage. The voltage raise if propelled faster like your bicycle light becomes brighter as faster you ride!
The regulator has to reach this voltage and raise it (slightly) so the current will not come out of the "generator" instead it will go into the now "Motor". You can not raise the voltage more because it would produce a gigantic current.
I develop solar grid inverter and it is exactly the same way how to feed the PV-current into the grid.
(Grid = Generator Voltage)
If someone proves me wrong, let me know, I would really like to learn more about the e-Motor technique!
-
Here's something I found interesting..... I was Looking at the Zero DS ZF11.4....
126mi city
82mi combined
61mi highway @70mph
The gearing, controller and motor are all the same. The only real differences I see are the DS tires and different suspension. The DS is 8lbs heavier.
So the kWh/mi for the Zero DS ZF11.4 is:
10kWh/126mi = 79.4Wh/mi city
10kWh/82mi = 122Wh/mi combined
10kWh/61mi = 164Wh/mi combined
And the kWh/mi for the Zero S ZF11.4 is:
10kWh/137mi = 73Wh/mi city
10kWh/93mi = 107.5Wh/mi combined
10kWh/70mi = 142.9Wh/mi combined
And we have the Brammo Empulse R/E1:
9.3kWh/121mi = 77Wh/mi city
9.3kWh/77mi = 120.8Wh/mi combined
9.3kWh/56mi = 166Wh/mi combined
For City, Zero S to DS jumps from 73Wh/mi to 79.4Wh/mi on city, and from 142.9Wh/mi up to 164Wh/mi for highway at 70mph.
That's a bit surprising. Do dual sport tires really cause that much drag that would put the DS into the same range category as the Empulse?
Something smells a little fishy.... That's an ~9% increase in Wh/mi useage in city, and a whopping 15% increase on the highway.
-
They do differ in that the DS runs lower gearing as well as different tyre sizes. You would be surprised just how big a difference tyres make though. Have you ever ridden a drop bar road bicycle on high pressure tyres and compared it to a mountain bike?
-
Gearing is the same for S and DS on Zero's website. It shouldn't effect range that much.
-
Maybe they changed it for 2013, even then the rolling radius of the tyres will be different, so effectively the gearing is still different even if the pulleys are the same.
-
Maybe they changed it for 2013, even then the rolling radius of the tyres will be different, so effectively the gearing is still different even if the pulleys are the same.
Tire Diameters for the rear:
DS: 130/80-17 (25.189" diameter)
S: 130/70-17 (24.165" diameter)
So there's a ~1" larger diameter on the rear... that shouldn't change things that significantly.... that would really only effect acceleration .... but 9% and 15% for city/highway? That's a huge change for a different aspect ratio and some Dual Sport tires.
-
I would expect the tires to affect city riding power consumption more than highway riding.
The DS rides about 5" higher than the S. Probably is somewhat less aerodynamic - though 15% lower range seems high.
-
I would expect the tires to affect city riding power consumption more than highway riding.
The DS rides about 5" higher than the S. Probably is somewhat less aerodynamic - though 15% lower range seems high.
Discussing this on multiple forums:
Richard brought up frontal area.... and there's ~3" difference in seat height. That 3" height is almost all tires/wheels/suspension... the bulk of the bike stays the same. With that 3" height and lets say a 130mm width of the rear tire (~15") is roughly 45in^2 more frontal area. Lets kick that up to 60in^2 for good measure because if you do increase front height, you may increase the body cross sectional area a bit... but not by much.
Lets say the Zero itself is 500in^2 of frontal area... it should be close. I threw the values in my old elmoto calculation sheet with a 500 and 560 in^2 cross sectional areas, 0.8 Cd at a 70mph cruise. The drag Coefficient on these is going to be fairly bad since they're unfaired.
96.71Wh/mi for 500in^2 and
106.5Wh/mi for 560in^2
So a ~10Wh/mi change.... and it's right around 10wh/mi for other cross sectional areas I tried... like 400/460, 300/360
Looking at the Zero DS and S (166Wh/mi and 142.9Wh/mi respectively).... frontal area would account for 10wh/mi .... the actual difference is ~23wh/mi... so that other 13Wh/mi is coming from somewhere.
So yes it does effect the wattage useage some. I'd guess that less than 1/2 of that increase is due to increased frontal area.
So with 6.4Wh/mi change change for city driving between the S and DS (that's probably all to do with rolling resistance because the speed is so low)... and lets say another 10wh/mi for an increase in frontal area at 70mph... that's maybe 17Wh/mi estimated difference... but real world there's a 23wh/mi difference. Pretty close....
It's amazing what you can do with just changing the rolling resistance of the tires and your cross sectional area..... tucking sounds better doesn't it :)
-
your cross sectional area..... tucking sounds better doesn't it
I am soooo excited to see how Terry's "Vetter fairing" will change the values!
-
Luke (liveforphysics) who seems to be in the know about Zero motorcycles had this to say about the differences in performance between the DS and the S on the elmoto forum:
You're aware one bike uses a Sevcon Gen4 size6 and one uses a Sevcon Gen 4 size4 right?
That was news to me.
-
Luke (liveforphysics) who seems to be in the know about Zero motorcycles had this to say about the differences in performance between the DS and the S on the elmoto forum:
You're aware one bike uses a Sevcon Gen4 size6 and one uses a Sevcon Gen 4 size4 right?
That was news to me.
He didn't say that Richard........ He was replying to another post about the original topic, Zero S versus Brammo Empulse R......not to my posts about the Zero S and DS.
Brammo Empulse R/E1 = Gen4 Size 6
Zero S/DS = Gen4 Size 4
Luke works at Zero, BTW.
-
Still waiting for dyno comparisons and/or side-by-side drag races. Until then it's all speculation.
-
Luke (liveforphysics) who seems to be in the know about Zero motorcycles had this to say about the differences in performance between the DS and the S on the elmoto forum:
You're aware one bike uses a Sevcon Gen4 size6 and one uses a Sevcon Gen 4 size4 right?
That was news to me.
He didn't say that Richard........ He was replying to another post about the original topic, Zero S versus Brammo Empulse R......not to my posts about the Zero S and DS.
Brammo Empulse R/E1 = Gen4 Size 6
Zero S/DS = Gen4 Size 4
Luke works at Zero, BTW.
Well, that response got me confused. I was wondering why two such similar models would have different controllers.
Regarding the topic about the efficiency between the S and DS, I wonder if the specifications are incorrect? Perhaps the original plan was to use the lower gearing on the DS (as was done in 2012) and then the plan changed when the bikes were put into production - but the performance figures didn't change from what might have been determined from a prototype. That would explain the difference between the two bikes, although I still think the DS would be a little slower and have a little less range due to the previous discussion - just not as much as are listed in the brochure.
-
I think you brought up good points about the taller cross sectional area.... and together with the higher rolling resistance, and 8lbs more in weight.... I think it would effect the bike. Weight and speed both effect the drag from rolling resistance.
So the S to DS change in city, was about 9%... we can assume that air friction is almost negligible at that point so it's mostly going to be because of the rolling resistance. That rolling resistance increases with speed, so the faster you go the worse it gets (linearly).
Then, the S to DS change in highway was about 15%.... and the main difference being speed. the difference betwen the city and highway change is 6%..... So lets say the Cd*A (Coefficient of air friction times cross sectional area) is most of that, and the rest is because of the rolling resistance.
So I'd say it's close.... I don't see any glaring errors in those values.