I think the question we have to ponder before you answer this question is... "What is ENOUGH performance?".
I don't think this argument holds water either, now that we can see numbers from bikes like the Energica, the Mission, performance like the racing of the '14 Zero SR, your bikes, and a field of gas bikes. The only argument that makes any sense to me at all is that of the choice being for the "rider experience". Unless I missed something, when you compare performance between similar bikes with, and without a transmission it's a wash at best.
Here's some reference: https://evmc2.wordpress.com/2013/04/27/transmission-questions-finally-answered-zero-brammo-comparison/
Here's another post re the Laguna Seca results ca. 2013: https://evmc2.wordpress.com/2013/07/21/transmission-debate-qualifying-results-at-laguna-seca-fim-err/
As with anything else in engineering and Physics, you can get to the same place any number of ways. I have no problem with Brammo using a transmission, though I think the general consensus is that 6 speeds is more a function of what was available than what was best. And I have no issue with riders wanting a transmission because they simply like it better.
I don't, however, feel like anyone can point to one design or another and say it will give you better performance, and I'd truly welcome an education on it if I'm wrong. As long as it doesn't include the phrase "torque multiplying"
You might have missed the re-match between the TTX and Kenyon's Zero S race bike...
In the same 2013 season, Kenyon came out to race in the final AFM race of the season with the same Zero S that he placed 2nd on at Laguna Seca. This time, we put Eric Bostrom on the bike. The result was that Eric finished a six lap race ahead of Kenyon by about 20 seconds.
https://www.brammo.com/blogs/?p=1916Then... in 2014, we gave the TTX to Eric for the ReFuel event at Laguna Seca, where he bested the Zero qualifying lap record by over 2 seconds on his single, flying lap. He was also faster than Jeremiah Johnson's modified Zero, the fastest of the rest, by over 6 seconds on the day.
https://www.brammo.com/blogs/?p=1946Do I think that this settles things - No, of course not. I just want to highlight the difference a rider makes in maximizing the available performance from any motorcycle. Eric, a professional rider, was able to use the transmission to full advantage.
Here are the primary benefits over direct-drive (which I am also not against as a solution):
1. You can use a physically smaller motor as you require less torque from your motor. This may equate to more efficient packaging of your battery, if done properly. It theoretically makes the motor magnetics less expensive as well.
2. Clutch can be used to disengage the driveline in an emergency.
3. Final drive gearing is less critical with a multi-speed transmission as the rider can select different ratios.
4. Maximize acceleration and top speed. Less compromise.
5. Allows for variable regen through the gears as Flar has mentioned.
6. Since you cant' stall and the motor has torque from 0 rpm, you can choose not to shift. IF you're feeling lazy, put her in third and ride it like a scooter.
Here are the downsides:
1. Adds some weight (although your motor is smaller and lighter) and complexity.
2. Increases the driveline harshness with more moving parts and resulting mechanical tolerance (slop).
3. Requires more rider training and skill to master.
4. Adds cost to an already expensive product.
5. Having to explain the difference between motor torque and rear wheel torque by using the term "torque multiplication" over and over...