|
braking with your foot is awesome. As are Clutches and foot shifters.
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 13:52 |
|
|
Aargh posted:Ok maybe I was being a little over the top with hyper-extension but it's not the most comfortable of moves. There is something wrong with either your bike or your body.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 00:09
|
|
|
Aargh posted:As much as I hate to argue against you because you're always here and a drat good resource, you're starting to sound like an old man. Just because motorcycles have had the rear brake on the right foot for a while now doesn't make it the ideal solution, I'd have to argue that you have more control with regards to breaking on a mountain bike than you do on a motorbike. Ok, sure, I've only been riding for a couple of months now but breaking with your foot is a loving pain in the arse, I don't know but maybe you enjoy hyper extension. I was riding my mountain bike the other day (on city roads, at a decent speed) I could manage my braking a shitload better with two fingers on the brake than I could ever do on my GS500. Don't feel bad about arguing against me on things. I'm failable, I'm just another rider filled with opinions that I've made over years of riding. I do understand where you're coming from and I do get that it does sound like "The current way is good enough, why would anyone change it!?!" that the older generation loves to cite. The thing about it is...I really don't feel like it's a problem. Mick Doohan used a thumb brake after his big crash that he almost lost both of his legs in, but he gave it up once his leg healed. Short of a physical disability, it's a simply non-existent part of the normal riding population that wants a thumb brake. Is it the current setup the absolute ideal for braking? Probably not. But I think it's the best compromise given the configuration of a motorcycle and our limbs. The front brake is obviously very important, that gets a hand control, the throttle is very important, that gets a hand control, and the clutch is very important, that gets a hand control. On modern bikes (last 30ish years), the rear brake is much less important than the front. We have to balance the other aspects of our bike with our braking controls, after all, braking is only part of what you do on a motorcycle. My question is: How long have you been riding bicycles and how long have you been riding motorcycles? I remember very, very well the awkward feeling of learning the controls and feeling like I could do nothing but lock the rear brake on my ninja 250. I spent about 30k on my ZX6E with the rear brake intentionally partially unbled to get the lever to be a bit more plush, but now that I've got some time and experience under my belt, I'm a lot more comfortable with using my foot to handle the rear brake, even combined with hanging off at the track or tight, high lean U turns to the right. I'm not saying that the standard way is better in all aspects. I know I'm quicker and more comfortable with brake on my road bicycle than I am with the one on the motorcycle...but that's a different vehicle with a different set of controls and concerns. ATVs and Scoots put the brakes on the bars for a reason, when you don't have to worry about a clutch, it's better to put them there. But I simply don't see a good solution for this problem when you have to handle a manual transmission. It also sounds like your rear brake system may need a little work. I don't have that much experience with GS500s, but I don't recall the rear braking system being particularly uncomfortable to actuate...maybe there's a problem with it that's requiring way too much force to comfortable to use it. I didn't try and lock it or anything, but I dragged it here and there to smooth out stops and handle low speed stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 00:16
|
|
|
Aargh posted:As much as I hate to argue against you because you're always here and a drat good resource, you're starting to sound like an old man. Just because motorcycles have had the rear brake on the right foot for a while now doesn't make it the ideal solution, I'd have to argue that you have more control with regards to breaking on a mountain bike than you do on a motorbike. Ok, sure, I've only been riding for a couple of months now but breaking with your foot is a loving pain in the arse, I don't know but maybe you enjoy hyper extension. I was riding my mountain bike the other day (on city roads, at a decent speed) I could manage my braking a shitload better with two fingers on the brake than I could ever do on my GS500. If you + your gs500 weighed the same as you + your mountain bike, you had better bet it would feel much better than the mountain bike. The motorcycle has much better brakes, but it has a poo poo ton more wight to stop. A mountain bike weighs next to nothing so of course braking feel is through the roof because every little movement on the lever only has to affect a hundred or so pounds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 01:16
|
|
|
Z3n, do you really think a manufacturer would make an electric bike that would back flip at 20% throttle? Weird argument to make, in my opinion. It can only be a plus that max power is always available - the manufacturer will just find a way for the rider to modulate the output at will (or automatically through an on board computer, tech which is available now). In any case it is vastly superior to having max power somewhere high in the power band where most people will never go. And it is not better placing the rear brake controls some place other than the foot that you will also move, when getting knee down, or shifting weight, on the track? Does not seem logical. The logical thing for racing would be to have no controls operated by foot, thus having complete freedom of movement in the legs at any time. At least, that is how it seems to me. As for the sound, I won't miss it that much I think. When I started riding, the rumble was attractive. Now, 6 years later, not so much. It is not essential to my enjoyment, anyway. I think EV tech development will continue to accelerate, and become viable pretty quickly (eh, 20 years?). It just seems to have a lot of untapped potential to me, especially when you consider how much money has been put into getting the IC engine to its current state of development, compared to the electric engine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 01:35
|
|
|
Rnr posted:Z3n, do you really think a manufacturer would make an electric bike that would back flip at 20% throttle? Weird argument to make, in my opinion. It can only be a plus that max power is always available - the manufacturer will just find a way for the rider to modulate the output at will (or automatically through an on board computer, tech which is available now). But that's the big advantage that all of the EV guys go on about...how electric motors make full power from zero RPM. What I'm trying to point out here is that full power at zero RPM isn't the huge advantage that people make it out to be (on a bike, at least. Cars are a different story). We're past the days of lightswitch 2 strokes, and it's not like we're burning out clutches trying to get bikes moving. If there's no clutch, and power drops off at high RPM and you have to limit it at low RPM...well, that sounds a lot like an ICE. The point isn't "can you limit it", the point is that it's an advantage of an EV that is essentially useless. quote:In any case it is vastly superior to having max power somewhere high in the power band where most people will never go. If people are buying bikes with power that they're going to never use, they're buying the wrong bikes. A lot of people do that. And if they're riding around and never making it to max power, and they don't feel like they're missing anything, who cares if they never make it to peak HP? I certainly don't ride my bikes around with their peak performance in mind, just what performance I need. Sometimes that's all of it, but a lot of the time it's very little of it. quote:And it is not better placing the rear brake controls some place other than the foot that you will also move, when getting knee down, or shifting weight, on the track? Does not seem logical. The logical thing for racing would be to have no controls operated by foot, thus having complete freedom of movement in the legs at any time. At least, that is how it seems to me. It would be if there was a way to do it without compromising your other controls. At the moment, things are set up so each limb controls 1 control, with the exception of the right hand, which controls both the throttle and the front brake because you don't really use both at the same time. When you do (blipping downshifts) look at how long it takes people to learn how to do it well. There are situations where you clutch and rear brake at the same time, there are situations where you need to shift and clutch at the same time, so I'm not entirely sure where you'd move the rear brake to in order to increase control without sacrificing control somewhere equally or more important. On an EV, you get rid of the shifting and the clutch, so you could move it to a handlebar, but that's like saying that when you're on fire there's the added bonus that you are a walking marshmallow toaster. Sure, it's an advantage but it's somewhat missing the other major downsides of being on fire. quote:As for the sound, I won't miss it that much I think. When I started riding, the rumble was attractive. Now, 6 years later, not so much. It is not essential to my enjoyment, anyway. I run stock exhausts on my streetbikes. With earplugs, I don't even hear most of my bikes at freeway speed, and barely hear them around town. I like the sound of a racebike screaming away, twin, single, 4, whatever, nothing really compares to getting on to the front straight at Thill and hearing my SV spin to 11k or shifting a friend's R6 at 16k. The big thing for me on an electric that'd be neat would hopefully be much reduced vibrations. I got tired of the sound of motorcycles on my streetbikes after about 50k, because you're a dick if you run a proper race pipe on the street, and everything else is just not as good, not to mention that they sound crappy when they're out of the powerband and that's where you spend most of your time on the street.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 01:50
|
|
|
Z3n posted:
It's definitely a comprimise and I'm sure my lack of experience with motorbikes highlights them more readily for me. I tend to think that we don't complain about things because it's what we're used to, think about it, do you hear people complaining that fuel injection is bad and we should go back to carburetors? What about tires? ABS? Disc Brakes? I think electric bikes are going to happen and they'll probably lead to good things with new companies playing around with the ergonomics of motorcycles without the stigma of it's always been done this way. Sure they've got a fair amount of problems and limitations at the moment but they'll mature and give it 5 years and they'll be a viable alternative. Give it 10 and we might see Akira or the light cycles from Tron. Phat_Albert posted:The motorcycle has much better brakes
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 02:46
|
|
|
redscare posted:Oh and one thing nobody's brought up is weight. Batteries are loving heavy. I know I'm skipping a bunch of poo poo to answer this, but all of the others have been addressed already and are making the same arguments over and over. This has been addressed as well, but I don't want someone skimming the thread to read this and think you have a point. The current heaviest electric bike with a decent range and top speed weighs 324lbs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 07:31
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:I know I'm skipping a bunch of poo poo to answer this, but all of the others have been addressed already and are making the same arguments over and over. What is "decent" range and speed? Is it greater than 1/2 of the top speed and range of a stock 600?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 07:37
|
|
|
Z3n posted:What is "decent" range and speed? Is it greater than 1/2 of the top speed and range of a stock 600? "Explosions! In my engine bay? No sir, I'll stick with what I know; safe, reliable steam."
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 08:12
|
|
|
Switching the rear brake to the left handlebar wouldn't be the disadvantage people seem to think it would be. I think it would be better actually. You wouldn't really have to move your feet at all on the pegs, and hand controls just offer more feel in general. Yeah, it's just the rear brake, but still. It's only an issue getting used to having that brake on the handlebar. You could also set it up like a bicycle if you wanted, brakes switched around. Other than that, e-bikes are an interesting and developing market, but just not that practical yet. I would ride the hell out of that alphabet-soup $65,000 one, but I wouldn't ever pay that for a motorcycle without desmosedici in the name.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 08:45
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:"Explosions! In my engine bay? No sir, I'll stick with what I know; safe, reliable steam." You're a fantastic advocate for the future 
Z3n fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Jan 1, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 08:45
|
|
|
GET A REAL BIKE, WHIZZER. fuckin kids with your fuckin lectrics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 11:59
|
|
|
quote:What would it take for you to care about electric bikes? Well, as a commuter device, they've got to compete with the millions of old UJMs and BMWs out there that are incredibly cheap, simple to maintain and built like tanks. Also, I'd like some reassurance that the batteries aren't going to turn into a giant hazmat puddle when I wreck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 12:16
|
|
|
^^^ There's a huge list of things an electric bike would need to do before i would consider buying one, buts lets keep it simple. 150+ mile range at 60, 5 minute recharge. Chances of that happening in the next 10 years are so slim that talk of top speeds, power and outlay just don't matter at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 13:21
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:"Explosions! In my engine bay? No sir, I'll stick with what I know; safe, reliable steam." How is that an unreasonable request?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 17:09
|
|
|
For me to even think about an electric bike it would have to be pretty drat impressive. Somewhere along the lines of way cheaper than a comparable ICE machine with greater range and less maintenance. As it is now, I am more than happy with ICE bikes. I like the noise. I like the smells. I like how far you can go on a tank of fuel. I like how easy and quick it is to get more 'energy' into the bike so I can get back on the road. Another thing that's going to suck about electric bikes is something a lot of us like to do here. Resurrect older machines. If an electric bike has been sitting in a barn for 20 years what good will it be? Battery tech will certainly have passed it by decades ago. Where are you going to find controllers or whatever else it takes to get them going? To everyone digging on the idea of having the rear brake on the bars, you know you can put it there if you want right? Have at it and see if you like it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 18:03
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:"Explosions! In my engine bay? No sir, I'll stick with what I know; safe, reliable steam." Well, to be fair when gas was coming out it wasn't like they were going "Check out this poo poo, it costs about the same, won't get you anywhere close to the range you get with steam, then you can't just pour some more water in it and go again you have to wait 4 hours, but in 10 years it's gone be awesome!" Really, gas won out over steam because it was better all around. So that argument is invalid. It would be valid if electricity bikes were bam boom pow, but they aren't. But for the hippies that are doing the green thing and eating tofu? There's going to be a HUGE market for these electric bikes, don't worry. Me? I support global warming, gently caress this cold poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 19:01
|
|
|
I'm going to say I dont like electric bikes because of this thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 19:04
|
|
|
Z3n posted:I'd love to see an electric class, but it's not going to happen, because you'd need enough batteries to sink the titanic in order to power a grid of 30 bikes for one race weekend. http://www.egrandprix.com/index.php
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 19:59
|
|
|
Zenaida posted:http://www.egrandprix.com/index.php http://www.egrandprix.com/index_nav.php?cat=races&sub=results 6 entries, 3 DNFs, and they're running at below half the speed of the ICE bikes. If an electric could break the 100mph/lap mark at the IOM that'd be impressive, but it's just not happening. And these are the best bikes in the world, barely able to complete a ~40 mile course at a speed that'd keep up with traffic on a freeway in the US. I will try and check out the race at infineon though...could be interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 20:47
|
|
|
Z3n posted:You're a fantastic advocate for the future You're a fantastic example of a person who resists change and advancement by making completely unreasonable requests of new technology. Phat_Albert posted:How is that an unreasonable request? Since when is a new technology expected to be instantly better than the technology it is going to replace? Since when are sportbikes the bar to which other bikes are measured? Electric bikes are currently targeting the commuter market, not the hardcore racer wannabe who puts 100 miles per year on his 200hp race replica. Why in the world would you judge a commuter product against a race replica? Are Bandits considered poo poo because they don't put down the same times around Laguna Seca as a GSX-R 1000? Silver posted:Well, to be fair when gas was coming out it wasn't like they were going "Check out this poo poo, it costs about the same, won't get you anywhere close to the range you get with steam, then you can't just pour some more water in it and go again you have to wait 4 hours, but in 10 years it's gone be awesome!" When ICE engines came out the steam car companies did indeed run a smear campaign warning people of explosions, fuel that goes bad after sitting for awhile, no distribution network with which you could refuel your ICE equipped vehicle, overly complicated and messy engines, and a complete lack of performance and range compared to steam.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 21:20
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:You're a fantastic example of a person who resists change and advancement by making completely unreasonable requests of new technology. You're right, it's completely unreasonable to expect that if I'm going to buy a new product, that it measure up to the competition. Instead, I should put my blinders on and simply follow what some dude says will be the future. If you'll excuse me, there's a bum named Elvis Lightning Christ offering me a fantastic deal on a perpetual motion machine. quote:Since when is a new technology expected to be instantly better than the technology it is going to replace? Since when are sportbikes the bar to which other bikes are measured? It's not expected to be instantly better, but if it wants to be THE FUTURE OF MOTORCYCLES, it had better be good at something. Anything would be a start. The thing that I love about the proponents of electric motorcycles is they act like they're good. They may be good one day. They may be very good, one day. But today, asking me to be excited about a turd with wheels because it's an ELECTRIC MOTORCYCLE is totally condescending. Make something worth buying before you start exhorting the FUTURE OF BIKES. At the moment electric motorcycles have delivered about as much as the Phantom has delivered the future of videogames. quote:Electric bikes are currently targeting the commuter market, not the hardcore racer wannabe who puts 100 miles per year on his 200hp race replica. Why in the world would you judge a commuter product against a race replica? Are Bandits considered poo poo because they don't put down the same times around Laguna Seca as a GSX-R 1000? Honestly, it doesn't matter what you compare it to, they still are in a place where they suck immense cock compared to anything. I'm not asking for equality. I'm asking for the bikes to be better than me on a bicycle, or a trail 90, over the course of a day. You can compare it to whatever you want, it doesn't matter, they still simply suck balls. A Trail 90 (or me on a bicycle) would outperform half of the IOM Electric TT grid, by simply finishing the race. That's hilariously bad. We're not talking crashes here, either, we're talking the technology simply doesn't exist for it to reliably make it the length of the course. All you have to do is travel 40 miles, and fully 50% of the motorcycles entered were completely, utterly, incapable. Well done, electric bikes. It's not like these people are scrubs either, they're probably absurdly brilliant, but the tech simply isn't there. quote:When ICE engines came out the steam car companies did indeed run a smear campaign warning people of explosions, fuel that goes bad after sitting for awhile, no distribution network with which you could refuel your ICE equipped vehicle, overly complicated and messy engines, and a complete lack of performance and range compared to steam. And believe it or not, there are still steam engines that are going strong. In the correct place, steam is a valid power source. And in a very, very niche area, with a lot of caveats, electrics are somewhat valid. Kinda. The problem is that in spite of their very limited applications, they're also expensive, underperforming and at the moment, completely unproven. Their reliability so far is not inspiring. What you don't understand is the second that electrics move to the top of the price to performance ratio over a bike's lifetime, I'll buy one in a heartbeat, as will a lot of America. But that's gonna be decades off, if it ever even actually occurs. At the moment, they are fighting simple physics: The energy you can store in a battery is not as dense as the energy that is stored in gasoline. Once they can overcome that, we'll be cooking with...electricity. Z3n fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Jan 1, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 22:04
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:Electric bikes are currently targeting the commuter market, not the hardcore racer wannabe who puts 100 miles per year on his 200hp race replica. Why in the world would you judge a commuter product against a race replica? Are Bandits considered poo poo because they don't put down the same times around Laguna Seca as a GSX-R 1000? Noting that Z3n meant an I4 600cc sportbike, the electric models out there now aren't even on par with the 500/650cc twins like the SV650, Ninja 650 or Ninja 500, which are hardly hard-core race replica superbikes. Even the venerable Ninja 250 (with all of 29 tiny horses, and very popular as a commuter bike) can beat most of the consumer-available electric bikes on range, performance, and price. sectoidman fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Jan 1, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 22:13
|
|
|
Z3n posted:I will try and check out the race at infineon though...could be interesting. Definitely hit me up if you wind up going, I would be all over that. Z3n posted:All you have to do is travel 40 miles, and fully 50% of the motorcycles entered were completely, utterly, incapable. I talked to a dude from Mission Motorcycles at the bike show in San Mateo, and it sounded like they could have done a lot better if they'd had more time and better race organization. I don't know what the story is with the teams that didn't finish, but I would not be surprised to see dramatic improvements the next time these bikes race. Zenaida fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Jan 1, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 22:22
|
|
|
Zenaida posted:Definitely hit me up if you wind up going, I would be all over that. quote:I talked to a dude from Mission Motorcycles at the bike show in San Mateo, and it sounded like they could have done a lot better if they'd had more time and better race organization. I don't know what the story is with the teams that didn't finish, but I would not be surprised to see dramatic improvements the next time these bikes race. I think that's always the case, honestly. But regardless, we're still talking about a fraction of the performance at immense cost, I don't even want to know how much has gone into the motoczyzc IOM electric. I'm sure electrics will be popular for a variety of reasons once they manage to be on equal footing with anything they're competing with. Until then, though, they're just amusing toys, and it'd be nice if the proponents of electrics would understand that at the moment they are simply oddities, not a legitimate means of distance transportation, or a performance vehicle. If you consider that the vast majority of motorcyclists will self identify with one or the other regardless of their skills or distance traveled each year, then it's easy to understand why electrics are, at the moment, completely off the map. Z3n fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Jan 1, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 22:45
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:You're a fantastic example of a person who resists change and advancement by making completely unreasonable requests of new technology. Ok, sportbikes and racebikes aside, lets talk commuter bikes. Lets talk slower motorcycles. Honda Rebel 250's, Suzuki DR200's, Kawasaki KLX250S's, Yamaha TW200's, things like that. How does an electric bike best these? All of these bikes are absolutely bulletproof, to the point of insanity. They all do 70mph, a couple do more, and they all sip fuel like they're on the last tank they'll ever get.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 23:23
|
|
|
I think the big question is why the gently caress shouldn't new technology be expected to perform better? What reason is there to buy it other than the fact that it's different? The only advantage you seem to be proposing now is that they cost less to operate than ICE bikes, but that's even less valid than buying a Prius over a Carolla. The choice bike so far seems to be the Brammo Enertia, for $8,000 new. With only a 40 mile range and a top speed of little over 60 mph(according to their site), it's only worthwhile for commuting to work, or around your city. For around $2000 you can get a used 150cc or higher scooter for the same purpose and speeds, or a 250cc honda rebel for around the same price. So what about that extra 6 grand you saved? what does that add up to in gas? Let's say gasoline is, on average, $2.90 per gallon for premium, and assume you charge your enertia for "free" in your parking garage. That $6000 you didn't spend on your bike will get you about 2069 gallons of gas. If you multiply that by 70(the approximate mpg average for an around-200cc engine), you would ride 144,830 miles on that 6 grand. On an enertia, you get 80,000 miles on, with an estimated 2,000 charges for urban commuting. for high speed travel you only get 20 miles, which gives you 40,000 miles, and then you need new batteries. Those cost probably a few grand each time you replace your battery pack. Is this motorcycle still making sense financially? Stop romanticizing e-bikes. When it comes down to it, they only come out on top regarding zero emissions, torque, and noise pollution. For everything else they fall flat on their face. Maybe they're the wave of the future, but for now they can't even compare. The E-GPs will be interesting, no doubt, but don't pretend it's a reasonable technology yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 04:07
|
|
|
Does anyone actually know what real life ranges are on these bikes? 40miles cruising on a highway is gonna be what.. half that in stop start traffic or high speed applications? vvv no gears, so that makes sense. Dubs fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Jan 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 04:59
|
|
|
enertia's website says literally 40+ miles for urban, 30+ miles for suburban/rural commuting, and 20+ for highway and top speed. http://www.brammo.com/learn/ Not sure for other brands, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 05:17
|
|
|
Slim Pickens, I agree with the realpolitik principle of new Brammo vs used scooter but for it to be actually fair you need to compare new vs new. Maintenance isn't free on a 250cc either, but it's not far off when you DIY the fluids/valves. I would consider an e-bike for two reasons: 1) My commute was 10-12 miles max (it is currently about 0.7 miles) 2) I wanted to get into some eco-hippie panties.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 11:27
|
|
|
You can get a brand new scooter for around $2000, or a vespa 150, capable of 59mph, for about $4200. My 200cc kikker was a about $2350 after shipping and tax, and brand new Honda Rebels start at $4000. At around 80 mpg, you'd still need to ride 110,345 miles to make up the difference on your electric bike(but probably still repay half the MSRP in replacement batteries). The oil and valves maintenance issue is actually a pretty good argument, but I'm going to side with the "If you can't even change your own oil you have no right to call yourself a man" theory. 
Slim Pickens fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Jan 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 14:11
|
|
|
My bet is that battery technology will make a huge leap in the next 5-10 years and everyone will be all "hey remember when laptop batteries last hours instead of days?  " and electric bikes will then outperform their petrol competition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 14:53
|
|
|
I also predict that technology will improve in the future. I also predict that our future improved technologies will be better than our current unimproved technologies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 16:01
|
|
|
Dubs posted:There's a huge list of things an electric bike would need to do before i would consider buying one, buts lets keep it simple. Seconding this sentiment. I was in the passenger seat of a Tesla Roadster being driven at 10/10ths on a track and it made me a believer in electric propulsion, at least for cars. The sheer tenacity and smoothness with which it accelerated made it feel so much faster than anything else I've ever tried. But the range and recharging speeds are still pathetic. For the trackday where I got a ride in one, having to charge it regularly would take ages and severely limit track time. What they did was tow it behind a big-rear end SUV for 30 minutes using the regenerative braking to recharge and that's just silly. Realistically, to make my next car be an electric, all it has to do is outperform my Fiat Panda, meaning 0-100kph in less than 12sec, 160kph+ top speed, 500km+ range, transport 4 adults in relative comfort and be able to recharge in less than 15 minutes. Even with those relatively conservative requirements, no electric car has so far been able to do this. What it really boils down to is that I honestly don't care what powers my car, bike, lawnmover, chainsaw, woodchipper or whatever, as long as it simply works pretty much as well as gas/diesel currently does. Or works better, which would be nice. As cool as the Teslas, Apteras and Zero Motorcycles of the world are, the technology simply isn't good enough yet. Just give me a practical alternative and I'm there. Currently, it seems that ethanol and biodiesel will be the technology of choice for the next 10-20 years. KozmoNaut fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Jan 3, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2010 00:31
|
|
|
In the comments of that hellfortleathermagazine website, I found this about a guy who bought a Brammo and got rear-ended in the beginning of a ride cross-country http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/11/the-short-strange-trip-of-nathan-abbott-a-cautionary-tale/ Chills running up my back now. Hope Mr. Abbott pulls through ok. Shows how much sound is vital, in general. I can't hear for poo poo, but my constant alertness of visuals compensates, but that doesn't apply to most people, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2010 01:18
|
|
|
I'm sorry, but it's loving retarded to be doing 40mph on an oversized bicycle on the freeway. Dead...loving...retarded. The danger in speed isn't in how fast you're going, but how fast you're going relative to traffic around you...a drat near 30mph speed differential to maintain battery life is just dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2010 01:47
|
|
|
Z3n posted:I'm sorry, but it's loving retarded to be doing 40mph on an oversized bicycle on the freeway. Dead...loving...retarded. To be fair to him, the article didn't mention how fast he was going at the time. He may have been doing up to 60mph. At minimum, most likely 45mph, which was quoted as his 'sweet spot.' Other than that, I wholeheartedly agree with you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2010 01:52
|
|
|
Aargh posted:do you hear people complaining that fuel injection is bad and we should go back to carburetors?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2010 02:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 13:52 |
|
|
the article posted:Nathan Abbott is no idiot uhh, this seems like the predictable outcome to me. Seriously, I don't understand the raging debate here about electric bikes. It is the same situation as electric cars as far as I can tell. They are cool in theory and may very well be the future of transportation. However, anyone who says they are ready for the masses right now is an idiot. The limitations are staggering, the environmental costs are nonsensical, and the technology isn't where it needs to be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2010 04:34
|
|