The editor of Motorcycle Consumer News, Dave Searle, in his Open Road editorial column, in the July issue of the magazine, compared the economics of owning a 2011 Zero DS with a comparable model, the Suzuki DR200S. He comments that Zero’s estimated range of 58 miles is grossly exaggerated. Their first bike had a non-working speedometer, but they were given a second bike, which seemed to have a more powerful battery that provided better performance and a longer range than their first test vehicle. They noted that the speedometer read 65 mph at an actual speed of 59.4 mph. They rode the bike until the battery went completely flat and achieved a range of 27.6 miles, noticeably further than the previous bike that they tested. (The article didn’t mention if that range was achieved using full throttle, but I assume that is likely.)
Recharging, with a Kill A Watt meter attached to the electrical outlet showed a power draw of 962 watts. It took almost exactly four hours to recharge the battery pack. Using a power cost of $0.153 per kWh and an average cost of gasoline of $4.39 (at the time that the article was written), they compared the cost of owning the Zero with the cost of owning the Suzuki. Recharging the Zero costs about $0.60. Figuring a practical range of 20 miles, the Zero costs about $.03 per mile for electricity, although that can increase substantially, if you live in California and go over the electricity power base rate, which might drive the cost of power to as much as 40 cents per kWh.
The Suzuki make a good comparison as it has a top speed of 71.5 mph, vs. 68.1 mph for the Zero and a slightly quicker ¼ mile time of 18.37 seconds vs. 19.31 seconds for the Zero. However, the Suzuki has a slower 0-60 time of 13.62 seconds to the Zero’s 0-60 time of 11.73. The Zero makes a 22.58 hp on their dyno, while the Suzuki makes 13.29 hp, it has a 5-speed transmission and weighs slightly less, which evens the performance comparison. (That caught my eye. It would appear that having a transmission can compensate noticeably for a lower power motor.) The Suzuki weighs 276.5 pounds and the Zero weighs 296 pounds. The Suzuki got as much as 86.7 mpg in their testing and averaged 63.8 mpg in both on-road and off-road use. This gives the Suzuki a fuel cost of $0.069 per mile, compared with the Zero’s $0.03 per mile.
But then you have to compare maintenance. The Suzuki’s cost for filters, oil changes, valve adjustments, etc. would average an additional $0.062 per mile, compared with the Zero’s minimal maintenance requirements of cleaning and replacing its motor’s brushes at 8000 mile intervals and checking the bike over every 4000 miles. They estimate that this would add another $0.033 per mile to the Zero’s mileage cost.
However the big cost for owners of the Zero is the need to replace its $4000 battery, which, based upon their analysis would need to be replaced every 36,000 miles, assuming a range of 20 miles and a specified 1800 charging cycles. The price to replace the Zero’s custom-made battery choked them up quite a bit and that added another $0.111 per mile to the cost of ownership of the bike.
The grand totals come to a ownership cost (over 36,000 miles) of $0.174 per mile for the Zero DS and $0.131 per mile for the Suzuki DR200S. Note that this does not include the cost of insurance, tires, brake pads and other expenses shared by both motorcycles. Their calculations also don’t include the $10,495 price of the Zero, which is much more than the $4199 price of the Suzuki, although current Government incentives lower the final purchase price of the Zero. Naturally, the conclusion is that it is cheaper to purchase and ride the Suzuki, compared with the Zero at this stage in the technological game. But they conclude that if EV purchase prices drop, and performance and fuel prices increase, the economic cost to own IC and EV motorcycles will become more comparable, but right now the advantage is still with the gasoline-powered motorcycle.
MCN prepared a full and detailed road test of the Zero DS, following their normal test procedures for IC motorcycles and I will summarize their test results, including performance and dyno figures in a thread later this week. I think you will find it interesting.
