Empulse haters

[flar]

Brammo has suggested that the 6.0 and 8.0 Empulse got nixed due to not being able to fully power the 40 kW motor, so it stands to reason that when the pack decays down to 8.0 kWh effective capacity that it probably will lose a bit of performance.

At least, that's how I think it would work : P

Would it be related to the number of cells needed to draw enough power for its performance?  If so, then all cells degrading in capacity would not necessarily limit the amount of power they can collectively put out.  In other words 10*N cells at 100% storage capacity can power it.  8*N cells at 100% capacity cannot.  But, 10*N cells at 80% capacity could probably still power it.  Otherwise, you would only be able to use the first 20% of the battery capacity, no?

Also, you say "fully power".  Perhaps 6.0 and 8.0 could not hit 100MPH and they wanted to stick with that claim so they only provide the 10.0.

Look at the Tesla Model S:

• 40KWh battery can do 0-60 in 6.5s and tops at 110MPH
• 60kWh does it in 5.9s and tops at 120
• 85kWh does it in 5.6s and tops at 125
• performance model with 85kWh and high performance inverter does it in 4.4s and tops at 130

As the battery capacity increases really what is happening is they are giving you more banks of cells, not cells that have more energy in them.  Because they have more banks they can draw more power in parallel and get more performance out of the same engine.  Similarly, I don't think it's the capacity of the Empulse 6.0 and 8.0 that are holding them back, it is the number of modules across which they can distribute the load when they are hitting their performance numbers...?

[nshortri]

Thank you all for the information on the batteries! The surprising thing about those batteries is that it has a very high use for the medical industry. I use a cochlear implant and I have two lithium ion rechargable batteries. I got the new processor back in 2008 and i am still using it after 4 years with the same 2 rechargable batteries. It is great batteries! I was just confused on what we are going to do with those batteries after their life ended and it calms me down when we can recycle it to use in farms.

I agree with other people that it is harder to change society's perspective to go toward the electric bike just because the people want that noisy harley davidson. I guess it is badass to see a harley revving up his dirty smoking full exhaust system. It will change soon enough when someone sees your new brammo empulse and go what is that? Hopefully it will be like the ipad and get everyone to buy electric vehicles.

[protomech]

I get a ton of questions about the Zero, and its design is a little bit plain. Someone caught me in the cafeteria @ lunch the other day with questions. Noone I knew, and I wasn't just getting off the bike; our campus has a few thousand people, maybe I'm becoming known as "that weird guy with the electric bike". I imagine the Empulse is going to get a lot more attention..

Battery-backed solar is a great use case for degraded lithium batteries, assuming they're still operational and efficient to recharge. Lead acid costs $200/kWh, or about $0.70/kWh-cycle (300 cycles). I'd love to get my hands on a degraded lithium pack (say 3x Enertia 3.1 @ 2.5 kWh remaining) @ $400/kWh, or about $0.40/kWh-cycle (1000 cycles).. more compact, better for the environment, less sag under load.

[Richard230]

Speaking of IC motorcycles, I just finished reading the June issue of Motorcyclist magazine in which they test the Aprilia Tuono V4R APRC. It has a 3.9 gallon fuel tank (which uses premium fuel) and gets between 25 and 29 miles per gallon of gasoline.  So owners of the Tuono will be riding faster, but not much (if any) further than the Empulse R.  The Aprilia costs $15,000, but the model it was compared with in the test is the Ducati Streetfighter S, which gets between 34 and 37 mpg and costs $19,000.

Both of these bikes will be quite costly to operate and maintain. I'll bet the Empulse will save their owners a lot of cash, compared to each of these Italian stallions, no matter what the MSRP of the Empulse turns out to be.

[flar]

So owners of the Tuono will be riding faster, but not much (if any) further than the Empulse R.

Because, presumably, when the tank goes dry it takes 5 hours to refill it? 

[Shinysideup]

Yeah, but will the Empulse be supplied with an open clutch cover so we can hear it chatter when we take off from a light and rev it before releasing the lever?

I mean, let's get our priorities straight here!

[jonnyd76]

Speaking of IC motorcycles, I just finished reading the June issue of Motorcyclist magazine in which they test the Aprilia Tuono V4R APRC. It has a 3.9 gallon fuel tank (which uses premium fuel) and gets between 25 and 29 miles per gallon of gasoline.  So owners of the Tuono will be riding faster, but not much (if any) further than the Empulse R.  The Aprilia costs $15,000, but the model it was compared with in the test is the Ducati Streetfighter S, which gets between 34 and 37 mpg and costs $19,000.

Both of these bikes will be quite costly to operate and maintain. I'll bet the Empulse will save their owners a lot of cash, compared to each of these Italian stallions, no matter what the MSRP of the Empulse turns out to be.

I must first say I'm the only one of my friends excited about the Brammo.  I currently ride an RC51 with a 15/41 gearing change, I barely get 120 miles out of a tank or ~ 30mpg.  I think no matter which way you go, you will spend a certain level of $ for transportation costs.  Haters are going to hate because of a number of reasons, let me see if I can break it down:

Noise:  "Mah harley sounds like a real bike" - I'll just put these in the old school supercharged musclecar group.  There are tons of reasons a "loud" bike might be "better" than a silent one.  Try an unpowered downhill ride on your current bike... see how much more in tune with everything you are!  It's absolute bliss if you ask me, a different kind of bliss than an RC51 with Yosh carbon pipes.  I literally can't wait to see some Empulses on the road.  I can't imagine how awesome it would be in the mountains where you can hear everything, along with see it!  But alas, some people will claim that louder is better for X reasons.

Cost:  (rumored) 20k for an empulse R, holy cow expensive!  Either you pay it now, or you pay it down the road in gas/oil costs.  I bet if I run some math it's really more even than people think, just hard to choke down the initial payment, when it's easier to justify $15 in a tank of gas now and again. 

Fun:  Yes, it's hard to go on a multi-day trip, but who really does that on a sportbike anyway?  Not many.  The most I've done on my RC51 is 250 miles, and that was only twice!  Every other trip is under 120 (or a tank of gas).  I've heard of a guy doing a multi day trip on his S1000rr, even said it was fairly comfortable... but he's definitely out of the "norm".

Pollution:  The rumor about batteries being less "green" than gas comes from the process to make those batteries.  Right now, electricity is much cheaper to purchase than gas.  You can bet if and when electric takes off, the cost will be normalized.  Already there are states talking about an "electric" vehicle tax, based on how many miles you drive.  This is to offset the same tax that is already built into the gas you buy.  Or google how Li-Ion batteries are made and the up front pollution that offsets your gasoline pollution.

I think in the end it's going to be like everything else.  People are going to have their own opinions, some will try and infuse theirs on you, and you will have to decide on your own what will work best for you.  I think some people love to knock things down, as opposed to see how awesome something might be.  Glass half empty, to half full.  Me?  I'm going to wait around a little bit till the initial cost comes down a little (or I get a giant bonus, or I'm the 1 in 1000) to get my Empulse.  But I can't wait!

[Brammofan]

I think some people love to knock things down, as opposed to see how awesome something might be.  Glass half empty, to half full.  Me?  I'm going to wait around a little bit till the initial cost comes down a little (or I get a giant bonus, or I'm the 1 in 1000) to get my Empulse.  But I can't wait!

Sounds like a plan to me.  And welcome to the forum, jonnyd76!

[protomech]

You can bet if and when electric takes off, the cost will be normalized.  Already there are states talking about an "electric" vehicle tax, based on how many miles you drive.  This is to offset the same tax that is already built into the gas you buy.

I would bet anything I own against a fuel cost normalization. Solar and wind provide an absolute ceiling on electricity costs, if we're willing to pay $0.25-0.30/kWh (2 to 2.5x national average) then we can completely switch over to renewable energy. I'm getting about 120 Wh/mile on my Zero, so $0.30/kWh is $3.60/100 miles or 100 mpg at current prices.

Take a look at our national energy inputs and outputs:
http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/diagram1.cfm

Transportation consumes just over a quarter of our national energy budget. Battery EVs of course are really just a switch from petroleum energy to a mix of coal, nuclear, hydro, and natural gas energy; replacing a 25 mpg car with a 300 Wh/mi four-wheeled EV or a 50 mpg bike with a 120 Wh/mi two-wheeled EV additionally reduces BTU consumption by about 50%. (you can get the same BTU consumption by replacing a 25 mpg car with a 50 mpg car or a 50 mpg bike with a 100 mpg bike without changing the type of energy)

Conversion to grid-powered transport via battery EV will be slow as long as prices remain high; even if we're seeing hundreds of thousands of EVs sold per year as we approach Pres. Obama's million EV 2015 sky-pie target, there are still approximately 250 million registered vehicles in the US (though not all daily drivers). Switching 1% per year of the US transportation energy from petroleum to grid power will have a very negligible effect on total grid consumption; after 10 years we'd see a 2-3% increase in total grid energy consumption, but a 30% drop in the amount of oil we import from the Middle East and South America .. and the money we're sending to countries that hate the US.

If you'll permit some hand-waving, most of that growth in grid consumption should occur during overnight charges. Overnight charging can actually smooth out the grid power consumption and allow the grid to use more cheap base-load power (24/7) and less peaking power only used during the day.

As for road taxes, there's definitely talk of switching away from or supplementing the $0.18/gallon tax to alternative taxation. GPS-based taxation has been kicked around, other options are a flat tax or some type of annual odometer-based taxation. There's also talk of bumping up fuel taxes as overall petroleum consumption drops due to fewer miles being driven and more efficient cars.

I think the public as a whole will reject GPS-based taxation. A flat tax or binning mile-based tax (say < 2500 miles, 2500-5000 miles/year, 5000-10k miles/year, 10k-20k miles/year, etc) might work. I believe some states already have a flat annual tax in place for EVs .. that's the simplest approach.

[860]

I would bet anything I own against a fuel cost normalization. Solar and wind provide an absolute ceiling on electricity costs, if we're willing to pay $0.25-0.30/kWh (2 to 2.5x national average) then we can completely switch over to renewable energy. I'm getting about 120 Wh/mile on my Zero, so $0.30/kWh is $3.60/100 miles or 100 mpg at current prices.

Here is another site that breaks things down from worst case (small home install in a cloudy climate with zero subsidies) all the way to the best case (large industrial install in a sunny climate, pre-subsidy). 

"the high solar condition industrial industry index was down to 15.15 cents per kWh in March 2012....Solar energy rebate programs have not been built into the data."

http://www.solarbuzz.com/facts-and-figures/retail-price-environment/solar-electricity-prices

At $0.15/kWh (sunny industrial production) solar would put you at 200 mpg.  Pretty cool, and a huge downward pressure on electricity prices if they rise over $0.15/kWh over time.

As for road taxes, there's definitely talk of switching away from or supplementing the $0.18/gallon tax to alternative taxation. GPS-based taxation has been kicked around, other options are a flat tax or some type of annual odometer-based taxation. There's also talk of bumping up fuel taxes as overall petroleum consumption drops due to fewer miles being driven and more efficient cars.

I think the public as a whole will reject GPS-based taxation. A flat tax or binning mile-based tax (say < 2500 miles, 2500-5000 miles/year, 5000-10k miles/year, 10k-20k miles/year, etc) might work. I believe some states already have a flat annual tax in place for EVs .. that's the simplest approach.

Right now electricity is already taxed.  As more electricity is used for transportation, a portion of those taxes that are already being collected should be earmarked for road construction.  That is truly the simplest approach.  All it takes is an ombudsman determining once a year roughly what percent of electricity goes towards charging electric vehicles, and then take that percent of taxes already collected on electricity and ear-mark those dollars in the budget to go for road work. 

[860]

I can't imagine how awesome it would be in the mountains where you can hear everything, along with see it!  

On my daily commute, I have a decent sized downhill stretch of interstate where I can maintain speed without using any gas on my motorcycle.  I keep pulling the clutch in and letting my rpm's drop to 750 every day on that stretch just to get a taste of what riding without all the roar and buzz of a V-twin SV650 engine.  I have to say, it is a really, really cool feeling.  I keep trying to push it a little further before letting the clutch out and going back to 5-6,000 rpm and having the drone and buzz come back.  


Edit:  Status change:  now an "Empulse Guru".  Just in time for the release!