I don't know of any instrumented tests of the SR ZF11.4. But there is a test of the SR ZF14.2.
Cycleworld
tested the SR ZF14.2 bike, and recorded a 4.3 second 0-60 time (compare to
their earlier test of a 2013 Empulse R at 4.8 seconds, and a 2013 S ZF11.4 at 5.2 seconds). That's about 10% slower than Zero's claim of 3.9 seconds - so it's possible Zero was mis-representing the production bike's performance, or used a lighter rider than CycleWorld, or the tests were conducted slightly differently. Some 0-60 tests allow a 1 foot of rollout "cheat" .. others start as soon as the vehicle begins movement.
Assuming CycleWorld used a 180 pound rider with gear, and Zero's weight specifications are accurate. The total bike + rider weigh 632 pounds. The SR ZF11.4 bike + rider should weigh 7.1% less, which should reduce 0-60 time with CycleWorld's rider to
4.0 seconds.
Again, that's slower than Zero's claims .. but noticeably quicker than either the 2013 Empulse R or the 2013 Zero S ZF11.4 tested by the same publication earlier.
***
Here's the paper math:
The difference between 3.3 and 3.9 seconds for Zero's claim when adding the Power Tank is between 0.51 to 0.69 seconds, depending on how much rounding you allow. That's a 15% to 21% increase in elapsed time, which all else equal corresponds to a 15% to 21% increase in total vehicle mass.
Zero claims a 45 pound increase in weight with the Power Tank, which means the total vehicle including rider should weigh between 214 and 300 pounds. Obviously incorrect. The expected difference between the two battery configurations should probably be closer to 7-10% depending on rider weight, or perhaps an increase from 3.6 to 3.9 seconds.
Peak power doesn't matter for a 0-60 test if it arrives after 60 mph; motor torque curve and gearing matter.
