Brammo Owners Forum
Brammo Empulse Discussion => Brammo Empulse => Topic started by: Richard230 on January 27, 2013, 10:16:28 AM
-
I just visited Terry Hershner's (offthegrid) Facebook page this morning to get updated on his adventures in the Bay Area (he seems to like it here) and I noticed that he mentions that he is likely the only person who has ridden both the Empulse R and the 2013 Zero S. If you are interested in his observations comparing the two bikes you might want to check out his comments. He has now ridden his Zero over 20,000 miles since he bought it in April and his bike is now carrying a 15 kWh load. https://www.facebook.com/lifeoffthegrid (https://www.facebook.com/lifeoffthegrid)
-
I've also ridden both - test rode them back to back on the same twisty road. My general impression is that both are fast and both stop well. The Zero is easier to get the power because all you do is twist your wrist and the 2013 motor is a monster. The Empulse keeps some of that ICE concern over whether you are in the right gear, but at a radically reduced level - being in the wrong gear on an ICE bike can ruin the effort, but being in the "wrong" gear on the Empulse just makes it "a little less" impressive. Off the line, the Zero still has a bit of that "easing you into it" feel on the throttle control, but the Brammo will kick you in the butt if you let it. If you evaluate them solely on green light launches then the Brammo would win the seat of the pants test, but both would do the job with plenty of authority.
The thing that swayed me to get the Empulse was the chassis. Every ride on the Brammo feels like you are connected to the ground. The Zero chassis is very competent and feels safe, but when you are canyon carving it doesn't "inspire" confidence like the Empulse running gear. Back to back on the same twisty road going as fast as I might care, the Zero felt fine, but didn't feel like it owned the road like the Empulse.
At one point I bought a german car and it taught me how to drive well. I now drive an Acura that has been very cheap to maintain and I can drive it well, but it wouldn't have taught me what I know today. I'll certainly learn a lot on the Zero and I would go farther at a time to do it, but the Brammo will teach me things.
-
At one point I bought a german car and it taught me how to drive well. I now drive an Acura that has been very cheap to maintain and I can drive it well, but it wouldn't have taught me what I know today. I'll certainly learn a lot on the Zero and I would go farther at a time to do it, but the Brammo will teach me things.
Good analogy. The Empulse will reward good, smooth riding with some incredible performance.
-
I haven't ridden the 2013 Zero yet, but of all the bikes I've owned for 40 years, when I commit the Empulse into a turn, it always answers me back in a very calm, reassured voice, "We can do this. We LIKE doing this. See ya on the other end."
-
I've also ridden both - test rode them back to back on the same twisty road. My general impression is that both are fast and both stop well. The Zero is easier to get the power because all you do is twist your wrist and the 2013 motor is a monster. The Empulse keeps some of that ICE concern over whether you are in the right gear, but at a radically reduced level - being in the wrong gear on an ICE bike can ruin the effort, but being in the "wrong" gear on the Empulse just makes it "a little less" impressive. Off the line, the Zero still has a bit of that "easing you into it" feel on the throttle control, but the Brammo will kick you in the butt if you let it. If you evaluate them solely on green light launches then the Brammo would win the seat of the pants test, but both would do the job with plenty of authority.
The thing that swayed me to get the Empulse was the chassis. Every ride on the Brammo feels like you are connected to the ground. The Zero chassis is very competent and feels safe, but when you are canyon carving it doesn't "inspire" confidence like the Empulse running gear. Back to back on the same twisty road going as fast as I might care, the Zero felt fine, but didn't feel like it owned the road like the Empulse.
This starts to confirm what I have only been able think, that the chassis handling of the Brammo is superior for the experienced riders., but beginner and new riders will find the Zero's performance easier to access. Thank you for this.
Terry really had issues with the transmission feeling like it was going to break, which is a shame.
-
The discussion after the post was interesting.
In the argument of gears vs no gears, one point that nobody brought up was cost. As Brian Wissman pointed out last year in his ESBK interview; adding gears to the bike allows better performance at a lower cost.
Sure, the RR doesn't have gears, but it also has a very high voltage system, which is a lot more expensive than a lower voltage system. When high voltage systems get cheap, it will be possible to get RR performance without gears and at a reasonable price. Until then, there's going to be a trade off: Gears vs limitations on low end torque or top speed vs high cost.
-
FreepZ - possibly.
2013 Zero S is very, very close to Empulse performance. Similar quoted top speed (95 mph vs 105 mph), similar 0-60 times (~5.5s vs ~5s). I think from a 30-80 mph roll the Zero might even be faster.. and those speeds may well turn out to be more important on a racetrack.
Empulse weighs more, so it's impressive that the IET allows it to be faster even so. But how much of that weight is from the IET?
I don't think we'll have to go to IGBT mosfets ($$$) to get very acceptable performance from a single speed drivetrain, provided that 100-120 mph top speeds are acceptable. Empulse and Zero S comparisons are not just a question of IET vs single-speed, but just looking at specs the performance benefit seems to be small. We should be able to tell very soon whether there is a racetrack advantage, due to operating the motor at a more efficient point = less heat.
IET has significant weight, packaging, cost, complexity, and maintenance costs. The small but definite performance IET advantage (comparing the Brammo and Zero implementations) may be worth it, depending on the particular user preferences.
-
Yep...both are good bikes.
It's (slowly) getting to be similar to ICE bikes...Both bikes will be well made, reliable and fun...the choice comes down to personal reasons...style preference...price...
like choosing a honda vs yamaha....or a bmw vs harley...
style
price
maybe a few other intangibles...like dealerships and such....
Gavin
-
I think there's a lot of intangibles. They're very close on specs; if either bike would be acceptable, then I think it's time to test ride both and determine which an individual user likes more.
It's worth noting that one person has done so (flar) and he bought the Empulse R : )
-
Where you ride could be a big influence.
If doing mostly city, the Plus and the Zero bikes would be stellar. Lighter, very nimble. No clutch. Of course you could bypass the clutch for almost all city driving with the Empulse too.
If doing mostly highway and twisties, the Empulse would likely hold an advantage. The extra weight is actually very nice on the highway. More stable, less being blown around by trucks. And every rider has said the Empulse is crazy stable on mountain twisties. I'm sure the Plus and Zero bikes would do quite nicely in the twisties, but the Empulse would hold the road a bit better.
I still say that it will mostly come down to style. And the Clutch. Do you like a clutch or not? Do you like the Brammo Style or the Zero Style...and then, importantly, do you have a dealership in your town?
Gavin
-
What clutch? Oh that clutch.
I would consider clutch issues if not for:
- you don't need it for stop and go (no more cramped clutch hand in the city)
- you don't really need it for upshifts (the power train is very power shift-friendly)
- you sometimes don't need it for downshifts (I can usually get 2nd->1st to trigger coming to a stop, but less success on other gears)
When they started designing the (final version of the) Empulse there was no way they were going to get here without a transmission, but unfortunately the development time lasted long enough for motor development to catch up. I imagine that cost might be lower with a transmission, but it's hard to gauge that from the evidence of the Empulse vs. 2013 Zero line. But, when/if the e-moto segment takes off the economies of scale will do a lot to erase that cost advantage.
I've been telling people that this may be the only bike ever produced with a transmission - Zero is not likely to go there and by the time they bring out the Empulse's successor then high voltage will be cheaper and there will be nearly no need. It would probably still have a transmission if it is a light spec upgrade like the Enertia -> Enertia Plus, but probably not if it were a new design/model. On the other hand, Zero had to spend a bit of money designing a custom motor so it may not be possible to get to this level of performance without that kind of investment.
But, that's just a seat of the pants guess as to how the industry will evolve, I don't have much experience in electrical systems and motors. I'm just watching what the industry is doing and garnering tidbits of information about the technology from these forums...
-
Flar, you have a pm. :)
-
I think some of it also depends upon your local charging infrastructure. Input power is fairly easy to compare, though I'm assuming charging efficiency is roughly comparable.
NOTE: charging rates compared below compare miles charged per unit time, not bike 0-100% charging
110V AC (conventional mains): Zero S charges 10% faster
Zero S and Empulse are both limited by 110V AC charging. Zero charges at 14A. I suspect Empulse charges around 14-15A on 110V. Obviously you're not going to charge quickly with either bike, but the Zero will charge around 10% faster if you must.
230V AC (J1772/conventional mains): Empulse charges > 2x as quickly
Empulse shines on 230V AC charging (whether from national plug or J1772). Empulse can pull 16A @ 230V AC, Zero S can pull 6.6A @ 230V AC. Empulse will charge > 2x as quickly. Note that J1772 is a $500 option for the Zero bikes.
Fast DC: Zero S charges > 4x as quickly as 230V AC Empulse
CHAdeMO charging stations are still pretty rare on the ground. Pretty fantastic if you live in an area with multiple CHAdeMO stations. Bit of a gamble otherwise.
Sounds like Brammo is betting on SAE combo DC for the future. That may well be the best technical solution - but CHAdeMO has a 3 year lead on infrastructure rollout.
I'd really love to knock some heads together over CHAdeMO and SAE J1772 DC. There may be a long-term gain to introducing a second recent DC-charging standard, but in the short term I feel like J1772 DC is very hurtful to charging infrastructure rollout and EV adoption.
The Chevy Spark EV is due to be released summer 2013, first EV with the SAE DC combo plug. 80% charge in 20 minutes is pretty hot.
-
Funny, I was typing for hours last night writing a post on this very subject. If the Empulse doesn't have significantly faster 0-60 time then the transmission will be seen as all but pointless. The transmission should ease the load on the drive system while better acceleration. The Empulse as has liquid cooling. The Empulse should be able to accelerate harder for longer everywhere. The performance should be more more consistent at the very least. If you want to go head to head with the ICE bike you have to have better numbers. That's 0-60, 1/4 mile, lap times, and less important now a day is top speed as I am surprised to find. I feel that even with 80kW you have to have a transmission be competitive. I am suspect of a 5 second 0-60 on the 2013 Zero because it is air cooled, and the load that will put on the drivetrain. I am waiting to be proven wrong, however.
-
The dashboard reports 12Amp charging current for most of the charging cycle on the Empulse.
The rated time in the specs is 3.5 hour charging time for the Empulse on Level 2 and 1 hour charging the '13 Zero on CHAdeMO so not quite 4x.
I'm curious as to how CHAdeMO has a 3 year lead on charging infrastructure when stations didn't start appearing in the US until just the past couple of months?
Also, there is nothing in the literature that implies any support for J1772DC on the Empulse. Has anyone seen any references to it being able to support the SAE DC standard later? How hard would it be to develop a CHAdeMO to SAE DC adapter?
-
Zero S ZF11.4 is 93 miles combined city/highway.
95% charge in 1.0 hour (93 miles * 95% / 1.0 hour) = 88.3 miles/hour (40.8 seconds per mile!)
Empulse is 77 miles combined city/highway.
99% charge in 3.5 hours (77 miles * 99% / 3.5 hour) = 21.8 miles/hour
Zero charge rate (miles charged per hour) is 4.05x Empulse.
Pure highway is 70 miles and 56 miles respectively, 66.5 miles/hr and 15.8 miles/hr. Zero rate is 4.21x Empulse.
***
Empulse does not support J1772 DC. I'll update the post to clarify.
***
The first CHAdeMO station in the US was installed in 2010 (http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/06/north-americas-first-public-use-quick-charge-station-opens-in-p/).
Rollout has been slow to date - maybe 200 total installations in the US. Japan has 1300 installations - on an island that size, CHAdeMO is very easy to find. 1866 installations in total (PDF) (http://www.chademo.com/pdf/changeinchargingstation.pdf) - see the attached image for the summary.
This is definitely not an insurmountable "first mover" advantage, but they do have some amount of traction.
***
I would think all the power electronics bits would be shared between the two systems .. the differences primarily are pinout and signalling. I wouldn't be surprised to see combo stations crop up that handle CHAdeMO, J1772 AC, J1772 DC.
In Japan Tesla will apparently offer a CHAdeMO to Tesla adapter (http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1081598_tesla-model-s-to-have-chademo-quick-charge-adaptor-in-japan). Presumably a similar adapter could be developed between SAE J1772 DC and CHAdeMO once one standard dominates.. better than HD DVD vs Bluray I suppose.
-
I thought CHAdeMO chargers had been in the country for over a year now, at least? As far as the J1772 DC fast charge, Proto was referring to my interview with Brian Wismann when we talked about charging standards. Basically Brian think that is the way to go because the standard supports both AC and DC charging in one socket, instead of needing two separate ones.
-
@proto - you might want to clarify "mile for mile" because "bike A charges twice as quickly as bike B" sounds to me like a measure of the 0-99% times, not the 0-NN mile times...
@ttxgpfan - when I checked the CHAdeMO map back in October when Zero made announcements there were only a handful of stations in the US. They may have been there for more than a year, but they were so scarce that I wouldn't have made any plans on them. Even today there are now just a few dozen, but they are all concentrated in a small number of urban centers that sought to introduce them. Many major cities still have 0 coverage. That's not really much of a lead.
-
Not arguing what has a foot hold and what doesn't, or what is in convenient places or not, just thought CHAdeMO had been around a while. The Nissan Leaf Plant is just out side Nashville, which I am near. There have been some Chademo stations in Nashville for a while now.
-
Found this blurb about J1772 DC.
From torquenews (http://www.torquenews.com/1075/electric-car-fast-charging-feud-between-sae-and-chademo-who-will-win):
The benefit most touted by the SAE committee is that it means for a single hole in the car's body. Automobile designers are accustomed to designing a single hole for the gasoline nozzle, and apparently don't like to accommodate two holes, one for the J1772 socket, the other for the CHADEMO socket. Of course, the Nissan Leaf designers managed to squeeze both into one hole, simply by making it a very large hole in the nose of the car.
Earlier we asked whether the charging station networks were going to face an expensive rip-and-upgrade process. Once electric cars implementing the SAE standard start being sold (supposedly in 2013), CHADEMO will have a limited useful life. Nissan and Mitsubishi may end up adopting the SAE standard, just as Sony eventually began selling VHS players. Rendering CHADEMO a legacy standard means charging station network operators would face the question of continuing to support both CHADEMO and the newer SAE standard. It appears the charging station vendors are thinking ahead with at least ABB, Eaton, and Schneider Electric saying their CHADEMO stations have an upgrade path to support the SAE fast charging standard.
Is it possible to build an adapter for CHADEMO electric cars to use the new SAE DC Fast Charge connectors? It doesn't appear so, because the DC portion of the SAE plug is electrically incompatible with CHADEMO. The CHADEMO plug has two large pins for a DC connection, and several smaller pins for a CAN-bus connection allowing the car and the charger to talk with each other. The new SAE plug has two pins for the DC connection, and uses the HomePlug Green Phy communication protocol to communicate between car and charging station. If an adapter could be built, it would be complex.
Emphasis added.
Humm, I thought J1772 DC was supposed to use the J1772 AC control pins for signalling. Homeplug has been in the powerline networking business for a while (literally networking using the powerline) .. I would guess Homeplug Green PHY is an extension of this.
I suspect Tesla will also have a difficult time building a SAE combo DC adapter.
-
Just to jump back to handling comparisons for a moment. Based upon my analysis of the Empulse R's chassis design and specifications (which is based upon my having owned 40 motorcycles), I am sure that the Empulse will handle and be noticeably more stable around fast bumpy corners, compared with my 2012 Zero, which gives me a real nervous feeling when cornering above 60 mph on Skyline Boulevard in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The front end tends to shake and the bike doesn't feel very stable under those conditions. However, it is just fine at 50 and below. I believe the 2013 Zero has a longer and updated frame, which may improve its handling, but I still wouldn't be surprised to hear that the Empulse is more stable and will give most riders a more confident feeling in the twisties, compared with the new Zero.
-
@ proto:
I dont think SAE-1772 DC wont overrun CHaDemo, out of several reasons:
1.: Chademo pretty much owns Japan. If you want to sell an EV in Japan, you must support Chademo. Those charging stations were build by TEPCO, and I dont think they will rebuild/change them to 1772.
The same reason applies to several european countries (NL, DAN, EST, GB)
2.: The Chademo plug is more advanced and build with enough reserve to upgrade to 2x the amperage without any problems. That would give those charging stations the possibility to upgrade to 125kW of supplied power without changing the interface.
The J1772 Plug on the other hand was designed with lvl 1 and 2 DC charging in mind and may have reached the limit with lvl 3 DC.
3.: The J1772 was designed by the automotive industry, the Chademo by a power company. Any questions? :D
Seriously, J1772 lvl 1 and lvl 2 AC were about the worst, uninspired standards ever, the only reason to specify them were to hold back recharging technology imho. Having VW, BMW etc on your team doesnt smell like success either :D
Even if both standards would compete on fair grounds I dont really see any reason besides the non-need to build a second socket in your car (which would be a reasonable argument for motorcycles with limited space, but in cars? Youre kiddin.) to use J1772.
Maybe Chademo wants ridiculous fees for implementing this standard, but I cant see that. Btw, did you have a look at choice of chargers? http://www.chademo.com/wp/items/ (http://www.chademo.com/wp/items/) there is one for everyone :D
@ the rather bad distribution of chademo chargers in the US: maybe thats because of the rather weak (at least you hear its weak, couldnt see it first hand yet) grid? But I dont see how 1772-DC could solve that problem.
-
Does anyone know the highest continuous speed for each of these bikes? Secondly, do you think the water cooling will make the Empulse a better summer heat performer?
-
How about the cost of adding a CHAdeMO connector to a Zero. There is a reason it is an option - it costs $1800. Why would it be that expensive? Licensing?
-
Summer heat should exacerbate any cooling deficiencies. My 2012 Zero could only hit an indicated 86 mph in a rough semblance of a tuck in the summer, but hit 90 mph at 40 degrees.
The Zero has alternate gearing which should raise its 0-60 time to 6s but boost top speed to 105 mph.
I think it's possible both bikes may be able to hold their top speed. Zero may have the weakest chance, but I bet 105 mph uses around 28-30 kW. Question is can the motor and motor controller handle 75% load ..
75% load on the 2012 Zero is around 16 kW battery draw, or around 75 mph on the 2012 bikes. This is the continuous operating speed of the bike.. so I think there's a moderate chance the Zero could hold 100-105 mph.
I expect the Empulse should be able to hold 100+ mph until the battery dies. (20 minutes or 33 miles.. or about the length of a TTXGP race)
-
How about the cost of adding a CHAdeMO connector to a Zero. There is a reason it is an option - it costs $1800. Why would it be that expensive? Licensing?
Possibly specialty parts available from only one or two manufacturers + Zero markup. Zero's J1772 plug (which is literally just an adapter that plugs into the C13 inlet) costs $500. A UL-listed J1772 inlet costs around $100-150 online, and those parts are manufactured in the tens of thousands.
I wonder if they add any cooling to the batteries. We'll need to see active battery cooling to get 2C charge rates from fast DC charging, which is the holy grail IMO (plus 15-20 kWh battery). 90 minutes of highway riding for 30 minutes of charging, 180 minutes of 55 mph riding. Only 30 kW grid draw.
-
How about the cost of adding a CHAdeMO connector to a Zero. There is a reason it is an option - it costs $1800. Why would it be that expensive? Licensing?
Where did you get this number? At least for me the Zero-store tells me nothing.
Ive been wondering about the chademo-extra for quite some time now.
-
I got that number from a Zero dealer and when I took my test ride I asked the Zero representative why it costs that much and he wasn't sure, but he did say that the connector itself was fairly expensive.
I don't think it involves adding cooling to the batteries beyond what is shipped with the bike because I believe it is a dealer install (I know that they are saying you can add it later) and the picture of what you get is literally just about 6-8 inches of plastic and wires (assuming the picture in the accessories catalog is everything included).
-
ohhh, I want Brammo to use the Telsa connector...
then all the Brammo riders can use those beautiful Telsa charging stations
(http://blog.sfgate.com/energy/files/2012/09/supercharger_1_hero1-600x337.jpg)
Maybe team up with Tesla....
BT Motorcycles (BrammoTesla).....
The best looking electric cars with the best looking electric bikes all on the same showrooms...with internet ordering and delivery.
Gavin
-
FYI...
The Empulse R has roughly 90Nm of peak torque to 4500rpm. Running that through the gearbox and final drive equates to well over 800Nm at the rear wheel in first gear and over 700Nm at the rear wheel in second gear.
This is the reason that Aaron Frank, who has even run Bonneville on a Lightning bike said:
This makes the Empulse feels like it accelerates significantly harder, and for significantly longer, than any ICE bike with a similar torque output. It might only have a 100-mph top speed, but it feels like it gets there as quickly as any superbike.
Read more: http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/firstrides/122_1304_brammo_empulse_r/viewall.html#ixzz2JP365boL (http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/firstrides/122_1304_brammo_empulse_r/viewall.html#ixzz2JP365boL)
Having built and extensively tested a direct drive, 40+kW bike (Empulse concept) previously, I know that the amount of rear wheel torque achievable, and thus accelerative thrust, is nowhere near what the Empulse R is capable of. Even with 90Nm at the motor, you'd struggle to reach much above 600 Nm at the rear wheel and still achieve a reasonable top speed with a direct drive system.
I also feel the need to point out that manufacturers may differ in their philosophy for publishing specifications. Some may be conservative while others may be rather optimistic. I know that an un-named test rider has personally verified that the top speed "spec" of the Empulse is rather conservative...
Regarding weight, please keep in mind that the "system" includes a rider. If you calculate the percentage difference in mass based on the same 180lbs rider, it becomes a bit less significant. The mass difference is certainly less significant than the difference in rear wheel torque. Sorry to put it so bluntly, but we're comparing apples and oranges here when it comes to performance...
-
Don't underestimate the importance of the clutch...at least for this generation of rides (and likely one more after this one)...
The stick shift (all my cars have had one) is almost dead in the US, except for sport enthusiasts.
But most motorcycle riders are sport enthusiasts and like the clutch (ride a scooter and see the reception you get from motorcycle riders---I know first hand being an old scooter guy). If it doesn't have a clutch, it ain't a motorcycle.**
Now many new riders won't care. Heck many old riders won't care. Twist and go has it's advantages. But without a clutch many of the current riders won't go near an electric...
That will change...as people change...and as the performance of higher voltage becomes affordable.
But it's good to have a clutch version now. Heck, in the future it will still be nice to have a TnG and Clutch version. Some people will always want a clutch.
But, like stick shift cars, in 20 years---90 percent of EV motorcycles will likely be clutchless.
of course in 20 years I better have my flying motorcycle....and some depends...sigh...
Gavin
**this attitude will, and is even now, slowly changing.
ps...i do like that the Empulse is kinda Clutch for highway and twisties, TnG for the city (yes you can still shift in the city is you want...or not if you don't...a win win)
-
I think I guesstimated the Empulse concept 0-60 time at 6-7s from an old track video. That's acceptable from a track perspective (how often do you use 1st gear on a track?), but not on the street if you claim sporting aspirations.
IET vs direct-drive is a funny comparison. Which solution wins depends on what you look at.
If you fix power (say, 40 kW) then IET is both quicker to 60 mph and has a faster top speed. At least given performance claims.. a comparison review should sort this out quickly.
Fixing power seems like a somewhat artificial limitation; in practice it may be necessary, as there is not a great wealth of top-tier motors to choose from.
If you fix weight, cost, development time, or packaging volume.. then it's not so clear to me as a bench-racer. I suspect a 2013 Zero S with a Size 6 controller upgrade and 105 mph gearing would perform head-to-head with the Empulse .. I'm a little mystified tbh that the Zero S appears to spec a size 4.
Regarding rear wheel gearing.. need to see if I can find the 2013 Zero gearing. 2012 S is 132T/28T, 57 Nm @ motor output .. so 270 Nm rear wheel torque.
Edit: 2013 S appears to use the same rear sprocket as 2012. Say same 132T/28T gearing.
2012 S .. 132T/28T .. 57 Nm motor .. 270 Nm wheel .. 340 lb bike + 180 lb rider = ~9s 0-60
2012 DS .. 132T/25T .. 57 Nm motor .. 301 Nm wheel .. 340 lb bike + 180 lb rider = ~8s 0-60
2013 S .. 132T/28T .. 92 Nm motor .. 434 Nm wheel .. 350 lb bike + 180 lb rider = ~5.5s 0-60
2013 Empulse .. ~10:1 1st gear .. 81 Nm motor .. 800 Nm wheel .. 470 lb bike + 180 lb rider = ~3.7s 0-60
Quick envelope calculations, anyways.
-
IET vs direct-drive is a funny comparison. Which solution wins depends on what you look at.
We think the IET wins over direct drive on acceleration, top speed, and efficiency over a range of real world riding conditions.
If you fix power (say, 40 kW) then IET is both quicker to 60 mph and has a faster top speed. At least given performance claims.. a comparison review should sort this out quickly.
Fixing power seems like a somewhat artificial limitation; in practice it may be necessary, as there is not a great wealth of top-tier motors to choose from.
The power level is not "fixed" based on available motor technology. It's "fixed" based on inverter cost and the limits of a less expensive Mosfet based motor controller, like the Sevcon. To state it another way - around 40-45kW is the best "bang for the buck" with current (ha!) technology.
We have built 60 - 120kW direct drive bikes that perform well in acceleration and top speed, but require the use of a high voltage, very expensive, IGBT based motor controller. The IET is the ideal solution as it provides the maximum performance for the minimum cost, something I hope our customers can appreciate.
If you fix weight, cost, development time, or packaging volume.. then it's not so clear to me as a bench-racer. I suspect a 2013 Zero S with a Size 6 controller upgrade and 105 mph gearing would perform head-to-head with the Empulse .. I'm a little mystified tbh that the Zero S appears to spec a size 4.
Believe what you like, but I know who I'd put my money on... ;)
(http://brammoelectricmotorcycles.smugmug.com/Racing/Thunderhill-December-2012/i-SDgFSph/0/M/IMG_2290-M.jpg)
-
Really nice motors do seem to require unobtanium controllers, but is there really a wall at 40 kW? Curtis and Sevcon both offer MOSFET controllers that should support a 60 kW motor (at the 2 minute rate).
Nuts & Volts commented on esbk.co (http://esbk.co/2013/01/20/2013-brammo-empulse-r-vs-2013-zero-s-11-4-bs-and-spec-sheet-racing/#comment-987):
I would guess that the new Zero is probably using a Size 6 as well, but I’m just speculating there. Also keep in mind the Brammo Empulse use a Parker liquid cooled motor (142mm dia, maybe 120mm long) and the Zero S uses a air cooled custom motor (maybe 200mm dia, and maybe 150mm long). The Zero motor is large so it can handle decent continuous power. Maybe 10-15kW, but the Brammo motor is probably good to do 15-20kW continuous.
Supposing the dimensions are accurate, seems like Zero is going a big air-cooled motor / small controller approach .. where Brammo is going a little liquid-cooled motor / big controller approach. Same peak power. Zero should punch quite a bit harder, at least peak, if they also packaged a bigger motor controller.. but presumably there are technical (packaging? durability? weight?), cost, or strategic reasons why they choose not to do so.
70-80 kW peak with 100V MOSFET is probably the limits of the tech, but that seems to be doable looking at Curtis 1238 and Sevcon Size 6 motor controller specs.
A motor with transmission is always more flexible and can punch harder than the same motor without a transmission, ignoring losses .. basically it can always operate at high voltage / high current. Is it just cooling (controller + motor) that gradually reduces power? Is the Empulse output 40 kW continuous until the battery is fully depleted? Or perhaps more apropos, can the Empulse run flat out on a track without thermal limiting?
A bigger motor / controller direct drive system can operate at medium voltage / very high current at either low or high speeds where it's outside its peak power region. Not sure air cooling will cut it here. Presumably liquid cooling + a sufficiently large radiator would similarly prevent thermal cutbacks.
Do you see IGBT controllers getting less expensive in the next 2-3 years? I think higher voltage pack issue will be forced at some point for 20+ kW rapid charging, at least on certain niches. I recall many (all?) of the car EVs are using IGBT controllers .. will that eventually drive down component cost for bikes as well?
For 2013 performance my money is on the Empulse too. I'm looking forward to the races, I'm very curious to see how the weight difference plays out .. and how both bikes handle thermals.
For 2014, the Energica promises to provide a big motor / big controller direct drive counterpart to the Empulse and IET. I think $23k is optimistic .. but would love to see them meet their timeline and price point.
Edit: reworded, what a load of gibberish.
-
Speaking of cost, my guess is that Zero is making more profit per unit than Brammo. Zero does not have to pay for a transmission and associated components and their frame (I have seen them in the shipping boxes), which is made in China, looks relatively simple and easy to manufacture, compared with the frame Brammo uses on the Empulse. I am pretty sure that the European suspension components used by Brammo are more expensive than the Fast Ace (made in Taiwan) components used by Zero. Finally, even the Zero's wheels and tires likely also cost less than the ones used by Brammo.
Then you also have the lower overhead that Zero probably enjoys. I have seen their factory and it is just a warehouse with offices, a large parts storage area and a small area for assembling the bikes, using hand labor and small tools. The entire company seems to keep a sharp eye on low production and overhead costs in order to maximize the "bottom line". If I had to guess, I would say that Zero is probably making at least twice the profit per unit (whatever that is) than Brammo can, when comparing the prices of Empulse with the premium version of the 2013 Zero S.
-
I can remember that at the time of the Vectrix chapter 11 someone calculated that the bikes they made up to that point were over $100.000 each. So it will take a long time for Zero or Brammo to recover all the R&D costs. You need to be in this business either for the long term or aim to get bought/IPO.
On the IGBT topic, Vectrix developed their own MC (which uses IGBT's). maybe Zero or Brammo will go there also. I guess Zero doing their own motor is one step in that direction.
-
Really nice motors do seem to require unobtanium controllers, but is there really a wall at 40 kW? Curtis and Sevcon both offer MOSFET controllers that should support a 60 kW motor (at the 2 minute rate).
70-80 kW peak with 100V MOSFET is probably the limits of the tech, but that seems to be doable looking at Curtis 1238 and Sevcon Size 6 motor controller specs.
A motor with transmission is always more flexible and can punch harder than the same motor without a transmission, ignoring losses .. basically it can always operate at high voltage / high current. Is it just cooling (controller + motor) that gradually reduces power? Is the Empulse output 40 kW continuous until the battery is fully depleted? Or perhaps more apropos, can the Empulse run flat out on a track without thermal limiting?
Do you see IGBT controllers getting less expensive in the next 2-3 years? I think higher voltage pack issue will be forced at some point for 20+ kW rapid charging, at least on certain niches. I recall many (all?) of the car EVs are using IGBT controllers .. will that eventually drive down component cost for bikes as well?
For 2013 performance my money is on the Empulse too. I'm looking forward to the races, I'm very curious to see how the weight difference plays out .. and how both bikes handle thermals.
For 2014, the Energica promises to provide a big motor / big controller direct drive counterpart to the Empulse and IET. I think $23k is optimistic .. but would love to see them meet their timeline and price point.
The motor size between these bikes is not very different, so I don't follow the "big motor" / "small motor" argument. The Parker motor was developed here at Brammo (with no government funding, thank you!) and offers higher peak and continuous performance. It is also lighter, so the specific power is higher.
(http://i393.photobucket.com/albums/pp17/wisdesign/IMG_7962_1200x800_zps5161b3dc.jpg)
Sorry, a Sevcon Size 6 cannot output 60kW and certainly not 70-80kW and I think this is the "trap" you tend to fall into by bench racing with datasheets. You cannot simply multiply the rated voltage by the rated current and determine the power output. It might be able to deliver higher than 40kW for a small period of time, but only if connected to a power supply rather than a battery pack that has impedance and voltage sag.
I do see high voltage motor controllers becoming less expensive over the next few years, but the ones used in the automotive world are typically too large for our application. Also, don't assume that just because the auto industry is doing it that it's cheap. The OEMs have the ability to subsidize some pretty amazing costs.
I'm glad you've got your money on the right team... ;)
-
Thanks for all of your clarifications Brian (and your analysis, proto, that is laying all of the details on the table).
I guess I should stop telling people that I feel that the transmission might be a short-term solution to today's problems.
But, one thing I'm curious about - some of your explanations as to the value of the transmission are based on the cost of various components. And costs tend to be subject to economies of scale. Clearly we are seeing a great growth in this industry in terms of the viability of electric motorcycles. What kind of change in the economies of scale might need to happen for us to see the equation change in your mind? What kind of a market size might make the added costs and R&D for a motor that was capable of sportbike performance via direct drive feasible in a (mass-produced) production bike? Or is this not a question of "economies of scale" at all?
And I was also under the impression that "Parker motor" meant it was sourced from a company named Parker, but I guess that is an internal project name?
-
No, you were right the first time....
Parker is a motor company separate from Brammo...they have a close relationship it seems and they worked together on the Empulse motor...
Gavin
http://www.parker.com/portal/site/PARKER/menuitem.14ecfc66e7a40c1af8500f199420d1ca/?vgnextoid=43cb5242ade5c110VgnVCM10000032a71dacRCRD&vgnextfmt=default&Keyword=MOTORS&Wtky=MOTORS (http://www.parker.com/portal/site/PARKER/menuitem.14ecfc66e7a40c1af8500f199420d1ca/?vgnextoid=43cb5242ade5c110VgnVCM10000032a71dacRCRD&vgnextfmt=default&Keyword=MOTORS&Wtky=MOTORS)
-
I calculate the Sevcon G8055 output like so:
V_rms = 116V (max) /sqrt(2) = 82V
A_rms = 550 (2 minute rating, assuming this is phase current)
Motor power = V_rms * A_rms * sqrt(3) * power factor * efficiency
I don't have any good numbers for power factor and efficiency, so going with an optimistic 0.9 for each.
82 V * 550 A * 1.732 * 0.9 * 0.9 = 63.3 kW (2 min rating .. 10s rating would be 76 kW)
Say the battery is 28s 90Ah, charged up to 4.2 volts per cell, further suppose that under 6+C load it sags down to 3.2 volts per cell, 90V.
Then motor output is 90 / sqrt(2) * 550 * 1.732 * 0.9 * 0.9 = 49 kW.
Is the spreadsheet math and the assumptions remotely close to right?
Is controller performance dropoff just due to thermals?
-
Yesterday, in a December video review of the 2012 Zero S, I heard mention that the British motorcycle magazine, Bike, was testing the 2012 ZF9 Zero S and their review would be included in their January issue. So today I rushed down to my nearest Barnes and Nobel and picked up the last remaining and well-read copy that they had on their news stand.
The Zero review, written by Martin Fitz-Gibbons, covers 6 full pages, over half of which consists of color photos. Unfortunately, much of the review talks about the author's first ride on the bike and his difficulties in locating a charging station. All of the charging stations, except for one, were being hogged by IC cars and trucks and in one case the truck was actually occupied by a tradesman who refused to move. A couple of other charging stations were broken and one station not only didn't work, but it would not release his charging handle after he plugged it in and tried to remove it when his bike wouldn't charge. Calling the “help” line did nothing but refer him to the store on whose property the station was located and they had no idea what to do about the malfunctioning outlet. After going through all that drama, there was little space left for an actual description of the Zero.
But here are some of the review comments that were provided, which do not consist of repeating the specifications: Their estimated range for the 9 kWh bike is 55 miles in normal riding. No instrumented acceleration data was provided, but the reviewer commented that the Zero would accelerate from a stop to 30 mph in about 4 seconds and take about another 4 seconds to reach 60 mph. No ¼ mile times were provided. Steering geometry is said to be “sharper” than that of a Triumph Street Triple R. The bike's weight and performance most closely resemble the KTM 200 Duke.
The author says: The lessons are clear: even if electric bikes were ready for Britain, Britain isn't ready for electric bikes. Public charging might work in cities with a plentiful (charging) network, but they can't be relied on rurally.”
The Zero was taken to a road-bike only trackday, after a 70-mile ride to the racetrack, carrying a second charger in the rider's backpack. A few hours of rapid-charging in the pits gave enough juice for five laps in the morning and a further four laps in the afternoon, leaving enough time to top up for the return journey home. The author says: “While there's certainly not much to shout about on the track, it does prove capable of 170 miles over the full day. And in case you're wondering, it passed the noise test.”
The article continues: “Still, there's something utterly intoxicating about the Zero. It's the novelty of it being so radical. Electric power evokes a wide-eyed wonder. It takes you back to the glorious sensation of twisting a petrol bike's throttle and feeling it move for the very first time.”
After a paragraph discussing the pros, cons and potential future of electric motorcycles, the article concludes with: “As it stands today the Zero S ZF9 is fast enough to flow through traffic and has enough of a range for everyone on Bike to do their daily commutes. It is also the most fascinating, exciting and original bike I have ridden in many years and the one I'm most upset to hand back at the end of the test.”
Attached is a photo of the power and torque chart produced on the magazine's dyno.
-
I calculate the Sevcon G8055 output like so:
V_rms = 116V (max) /sqrt(2) = 82V
A_rms = 550 (2 minute rating, assuming this is phase current)
Motor power = V_rms * A_rms * sqrt(3) * power factor * efficiency
I don't have any good numbers for power factor and efficiency, so going with an optimistic 0.9 for each.
82 V * 550 A * 1.732 * 0.9 * 0.9 = 63.3 kW (2 min rating .. 10s rating would be 76 kW)
Say the battery is 28s 90Ah, charged up to 4.2 volts per cell, further suppose that under 6+C load it sags down to 3.2 volts per cell, 90V.
Then motor output is 90 / sqrt(2) * 550 * 1.732 * 0.9 * 0.9 = 49 kW.
Is the spreadsheet math and the assumptions remotely close to right?
Is controller performance dropoff just due to thermals?
Michael,
You're pretty close. Here are some comments from our lead motor guru, Dan Riegels:
Power factor is way too high, closer to 75% at Pmax. Efficiency is good. The only limitation is cooling. The 2min and 10sec rating are assuming a certain level of cooling. Voltage sag quoted is closer to 5C+. Low PF puts a lot of load on the controller.
I would tell you more... but then I'd have to either hire you or kill you... ;)
-
No, you were right the first time....
Parker is a motor company separate from Brammo...they have a close relationship it seems and they worked together on the Empulse motor...
Gavin
Parker is Parker-Hannifin Corporation. The GVM motor's development goes back to our initial race bike work with them back in 2010. Piece of trivia for you - Parker also developed the PMAC hub motor and IGBT based motor controller for the Vectrix Maxi-Scooter. Here are some better links:
http://www.parker.com/portal/site/Market-Tech/menuitem.e9f921bc8ae21676de92b210237ad1ca/?vgnextoid=896a58fc51cb8210VgnVCM10000048021dacRCRD&vgnextfmt=default (http://www.parker.com/portal/site/Market-Tech/menuitem.e9f921bc8ae21676de92b210237ad1ca/?vgnextoid=896a58fc51cb8210VgnVCM10000048021dacRCRD&vgnextfmt=default)
http://www.parker.com/literature/SSD%20Drives%20Division%20North%20America/Case%20Studies%20and%20White%20Papers/BrammoDaytona%20article%20by%20Parker.pdf (http://www.parker.com/literature/SSD%20Drives%20Division%20North%20America/Case%20Studies%20and%20White%20Papers/BrammoDaytona%20article%20by%20Parker.pdf)
-
Thanks for all of your clarifications Brian (and your analysis, proto, that is laying all of the details on the table).
I guess I should stop telling people that I feel that the transmission might be a short-term solution to today's problems.
But, one thing I'm curious about - some of your explanations as to the value of the transmission are based on the cost of various components. And costs tend to be subject to economies of scale. Clearly we are seeing a great growth in this industry in terms of the viability of electric motorcycles. What kind of change in the economies of scale might need to happen for us to see the equation change in your mind? What kind of a market size might make the added costs and R&D for a motor that was capable of sportbike performance via direct drive feasible in a (mass-produced) production bike? Or is this not a question of "economies of scale" at all?
I don't view the transmission as a short-term solution at all. Even with a high-voltage system, the ideal solution in my mind (although there are many others that would disagree) would still incorporate a multiple ratio gearbox (maybe or maybe not 6 gears). It's very good way to get significant torque production with a smaller overall system. A direct-drive, high voltage system would be "good-enough" for most riders, but it would still not maximize the available performance (again - my opinion).
Regarding economies of scale, it's hard to judge, but there are some options that may significantly reduce costs over the next 5-10 years. As for purchasing IGBTs, I've heard that you can't really impact the price at less than 1,000 units per month. As I believe would be true with any motorcycle OEM, the golden unit volume is 10,000 per year. This makes additional investment in the platform easily justified based on how small the amoritized cost of the development is.
As always, Brammo will endeavor to provide our customers with the best value (which I agree is subjective) of performance for cost using the best technologies that we are aware of. It is true that other OEMs may be using cheaper components and making more profit off their customers, which I'm fine with. My hat's off to them if that's what makes them (or their investors) happy. We'd like to focus on building a quality product first and a solid brand reputation off of that. I would be disappointed if our customers sat on the Empulse and thought to themselves... "Wow, Brammo is making a ton of profit on this... "
-
I would tell you more... but then I'd have to either hire you or kill you...
You should hire him :)
G
-
I don't view the transmission as a short-term solution at all. Even with a high-voltage system, the ideal solution in my mind (although there are many others that would disagree) would still incorporate a multiple ratio gearbox (maybe or maybe not 6 gears). It's very good way to get significant torque production with a smaller overall system. A direct-drive, high voltage system would be "good-enough" for most riders, but it would still not maximize the available performance (again - my opinion).
At some point, though, you can build a small enough motor that produces so much power that even geared for 100+MPH it is in risk of smoking tires and getting squirmy at launch. Certainly Tesla is in that ballpark where they are beating all but the fastest overpriced sports cars and still making 130MPH. At that point, how big, exactly, is the market they would be targeting by adding the weight and complexity of a gearbox for even faster launches?
As to how close the motorcycle technologies might be to that same turning point, I don't have a lot of industry knowledge. But, I have measured the 2013 Zeros with a butt dyno and they made huge inroads in this past year. That same butt dyno tells me that my Empulse still beats them, though, and their high-output endurance is still unspoken for - but I'm curious as to how long it will take to bridge this gap.
I hear you on the value of gears, and I have plenty of ICE car experience that makes me wary of giving up that control over mechanical advantage, but only because ICEs exaggerate a shortcoming that electric motors don't really suffer from. If a gearbox gets me from 4s 0-60 down to 3s 0-60 that's nice, but not really useful or a selling point for me. At highway speeds where I care, gears won't have the same amplification ratio if they aren't covering up for a narrow power band.
-
I continue to be fascinated when my Zero in slow-mo Eco mode takes off from a stoplight faster than the 300 hp SUV, pick-up truck, or Lexus next to me. There are lots of people buying vehicles with lots of expensive, fuel-inefficient, horsepower who never use it. I just don't get it. ???
Beyond a certain number, a lot of horsepower seems like a waste to me if you don't bother using it.
-
You're pretty close. Here are some comments from our lead motor guru, Dan Riegels:
Power factor is way too high, closer to 75% at Pmax. Efficiency is good. The only limitation is cooling. The 2min and 10sec rating are assuming a certain level of cooling. Voltage sag quoted is closer to 5C+. Low PF puts a lot of load on the controller.
I would tell you more... but then I'd have to either hire you or kill you... ;)
Well, I'd have a lot more fun with one of those than the other ;D
I'm curious how much power factor is a design consideration .. particularly if it generates a lot of heat = waste energy in the controller. Does the Empulse only liquid-cool the motor? I recall reading the battery modules have fins for air-cooling.. does the controller likewise benefit from air flow while in motion?
I don't view the transmission as a short-term solution at all. Even with a high-voltage system, the ideal solution in my mind (although there are many others that would disagree) would still incorporate a multiple ratio gearbox (maybe or maybe not 6 gears). It's very good way to get significant torque production with a smaller overall system. A direct-drive, high voltage system would be "good-enough" for most riders, but it would still not maximize the available performance (again - my opinion).
At some point, though, you can build a small enough motor that produces so much power that even geared for 100+MPH it is in risk of smoking tires and getting squirmy at launch. Certainly Tesla is in that ballpark where they are beating all but the fastest overpriced sports cars and still making 130MPH. At that point, how big, exactly, is the market they would be targeting by adding the weight and complexity of a gearbox for even faster launches?
Regarding smaller overall system - flar, what are your impressions about the Parker + IET motor size combination on the Empulse vs the Zero 75-7 motor on the 2013 Zero S?
I'd love to have a two gear setup on my 2012 Zero (maybe 20% lower and 20% higher). But looking at torque plots from Hollywood Electrics and their Sevcon Size 6 (http://electricmotorcycleforum.com/boards/index.php?topic=2521.msg10772#msg10772) upgrade, I think I'd get just as much performance that way.
Another point of comparison is the Enertia Plus vs 2013 Zero XU. Zero XU has a larger motor and weighs a fair bit less, runs 0-60 mph in a claimed 5-6s. IET would help the Enertia's performance, but it seems like a motor upgrade would serve it even better. Possibly a motor upgrade + IET would give it superior performance to the XU ..
I continue to be fascinated when my Zero in slow-mo Eco mode takes off from a stoplight faster than the 300 hp SUV, pick-up truck, or Lexus next to me. There are lots of people buying vehicles with lots of expensive, fuel-inefficient, horsepower who never use it. I just don't get it. ???
Beyond a certain number, a lot of horsepower seems like a waste to me if you don't bother using it.
ICE tends to be most efficient under moderate-high, constant load. That's part of why hybrids are so successful - the electric motor can completely take over all traction power during light load periods, and they deliver adequate performance from an undersized engine that will be under higher relative load than a conventional ICE.
While electric motor efficiency maps aren't exactly flat, they're a fair sight better than ICE efficiency maps.. so we see the 2013 Zero bikes doubling power and delivering markedly better efficiency. That's crazy talk in ICE land.
-
At some point, though, you can build a small enough motor that produces so much power that even geared for 100+MPH it is in risk of smoking tires and getting squirmy at launch. Certainly Tesla is in that ballpark where they are beating all but the fastest overpriced sports cars and still making 130MPH. At that point, how big, exactly, is the market they would be targeting by adding the weight and complexity of a gearbox for even faster launches?
Regarding smaller overall system - flar, what are your impressions about the Parker + IET motor size combination on the Empulse vs the Zero 75-7 motor on the 2013 Zero S?
I think the Parker+IET still feels better, but it is not night and day. Also, a fair bit of that is how willing it is off the line whereas the Zero feels like it is easing you into it. The Zero does pick up so much torque and soon enough that it isn't just "weak at the low end" and I know that they reprogrammed the 2012's to have a mild roll-on to keep the power requirements down, but the Empulse just launches you without any babying or drama and that is noticeably more fun and powerful feeling. Perhaps Zero needs to have that easement to keep their power system happy? Or are they doing it for safety? Either way, it's not crippling and it is still a lot of fun, just not quite as authoritative as the Empulse's launch behavior.
At 5MPH rollon, I'd have to ride them more back to back than an hour apart like I did to really answer that question. At highway speeds the Zero did not feel weak at all when simulating a passing maneuver, but I'm sure if I picked the right gear (or two), then the Empulse would probably pull a little more strongly. But, that is quite a bit different than "having to be in the right gear at all or just go home" for an ICE.
So, from the butt dyno perspective - if we were to freeze motor development at last year's levels (judging from riding a 2012 Zero), I'd say the IET was totally worth it without question. If we were to freeze motor development at this year's selection I'd say that the IET gives the Empulse the edge and you can decide if that edge is worth having to shift gears and replace oil or if you actually like shifting gears (I have been having fun trying to keep it at its efficiency peak on my commute, but I could easily live without that "fun" and it isn't clear how much gain I got from that). But, motor development is not frozen, is it?
Caveat - only a 10 mile ride on the 2013 Zero, but we did most of Guadalupe Canyon road:
http://goo.gl/maps/TbHhX (http://goo.gl/maps/TbHhX)
And, to put things back into perspective wrt the whole thread - the Empulse just mops the floor here with its sweet suspension and chassis. Combine that with the fact that the IET still seems to have the edge in performance and there isn't a lot to question about the current model - I'm asking more with an eye towards what will come in the next couple of models on the horizon.
It was definitely not a bad choice for today.
But, will it turn out to be a one-hit wonder?
Or will it turn into a nice option for only the highest performing e-bikes?
Or will we soon go the way of Tesla and everyone will ask "what gearbox"?
I hope my questions don't appear in any way to be a criticism of the current product, though...
-
I'm now in the position of deciding between the 2013 Zero S v. the Empulse. I've been happily commuting on my Enertia Classic, but now that we are moving from San Francisco out to Marin, a change is gonna come. If I take it easy on the freeway, the Enertia actually can make the commute one way, and I can charge at work, but there's not enough margin for mistakes or detours, and I'd feel safer with more freeway oomph.
I test rode the Empulse about 6 months ago, and just recently rode a 2013 Zero S. I was much more impressed with the Zero than I thought I'd be. The brakes/chassis/suspension are really all fine. I loved how light and nimble it felt. The Zero is not as confidence-inspiring as the Empulse, but it is more than adequate for commuting. And in that functional context, the Zero gives a lot more bang for the buck than the Empulse.
I think for me it will come down to a personal choice of whether I want my electric bike just for commuting, or do I also want to be tearing up the Marin twisties on it. Both the Zero or the Empulse can get me from my new house in Larkspur to Tomales and back, and that's some great riding (not to mention oyster-eating). But maybe I will want to keep doing that on my gas bike anyway. It's on those recreational rides that I really want to feel the sensations of a gas engine and the freedom of knowing that I could just keeping going if I wanted to.
Anyway, I've always assumed that if my commute lengthened and the Enertia became obsolete, I'd switch to the Empulse. Having ridden the Zero, I know feel it's a much tougher decision.
-
Thank you for that Adan.
I think the only way to settle this is that a completely stock 2013 Zero S ZF 11.4 and Empulse R (not TTX) are raced in the TT Zero, save for race tires. ;D Lightweight and larger pack versus race bred chassis and a transmission.
-
I doubt you would use the ZF11.4 for the short circuit races. It would be perfect for IOM TT though .. probably could podium 4 years ago.
-
I got to test ride the Empulse R again in a more proper context, a couple hours on twisty mountain roads. Having recently been on a Zero S, my opinion is that the Empulse chassis is head and shoulders above the Zero. The Zero feels just as quick, but I was not as comfortable using the power that it had. In many situations, it felt like the chassis just wasn't up to the task. The Empulse is a more balanced package and, aside from the clunky transmission (which I feel I could learn to tolerate), feels like a very refined performance machine.