Isn't it imprecise because of the lack of precision with ICE? Presumably a rheostat in your right hand eliminates that issue. *I have no dog in this fight, but just wanted to point out that with different power delivery there's going to be different ways to optimally ride the bike*
A clutch is used to control the power at varying RPMs of the internal combustion engine vs. the rotation of the rear tire. An electric motor does not need to turn more RPM to make power. With an electric motor, your throttle is effectively a clutch. Edit: more accurately, the throttle is a direct control of power applied to the ground.
The precise modulation of a throttle tube when the bike is moving up and down or pitching back and forth is much more difficult than using the clutch lever. Also, the ability to load the motor with rpm and dump the clutch in a controlled way is important for getting up some difficult obstacles. Without a clutch I don’t see a way to replicate that. It hits with an initial soft but quick ramp and then gradually loses torque. They are DOA for off-road/enduro work for many reasons, but lack of clutch is among them. Electric trials bikes have clutches.
Just tune whatever hit of power you need into the motor controller. You should have way more options with that and the instant torque of an electric motor than a gas engine with a clutch. Plus the controller will probably filter/smooth your throttle inputs in the same way fly-by-wire does on modern road bikes. Someone will learn how to ride one of these well and will likely be faster/better than a gas moto.
This has proven to be untrue in trials. Stop thinking ice vs electric and start thinking spinning flywheel and how it behaves vs trying to replicate that with a shitty approximation. electric power is NOT instantaneous. It still has a ramp, however much shorter than ice. Flywheels lose torque after initial hit and reduce chain tension. The spinning engine produces a stabilizing effect when approaching obstacles at ver low speeds.
The fact that it'll last as long as a 450 on a full tank of gas, at race pace, really pushed it home for me. I'll be puttin' around on it in the woods, so don't anticipate lack of energy being too much trouble. That, and the fact you can pay for the whole thing on a credit card to get that 2% back sealed the deal.
They won't, not even close. Look at the Alta which had about the same batt size, couldn't come close to that claim. I don't see the Stark being magically 30% or more efficient than the Alta was.
That’s part of the reason I didn’t go in on the first days of ordering. There’ll be a few months of real-world data to go off of before shelling out 13 large at delivery.
As much as I hate to come to this realization I agree. If the noise was not an issue there would be many tracks and land of all kinds still open for all kinds of activity wether it be paved or not. My KTM is as quiet as I can make it and have it run half decent and it’s loud, I still annoy the shit out or my neighbors though but they tolerate me for now because I do a lot of other stuff to keep them happy (ie I’m the local coyote population control). From a pollution standpoint I’d be willing to bet well over half of these will be charged by generators at the track. Most tracks I’ve been to don’t exactly have a ton of spots for RV power.
Exactly. 6 hours at flat out? Not happening. Unless they're on the cusp of inventing some new battery technology. I gotta feeling Stark will be nothing more than a fart in the wind that will be forgotten as quickly as it appeared.
Quiet? So what. The AAF (alliance against fun) will always find a reason to shut it down. Some people revel in their misery and can't stand to see others enjoying themselves.
It's advertised as six hours of easy trail riding, or one full Moto at MXGP pace. If it holds close to that, they should sell lots of 'em.
And with all the mines getting shut down, digging a hole with it can get you the raw materials to service it.
I saw the OP comment and it looks to me like it reads 6hr. run time at MXGP pace. I didn't dig any further. What you're quoting sounds way more reasonable.