Big bike thrills without the emissions, say hello to the Zero DSR/X
The drawback is the slow charging speed.
Very specifically:
Whichever [charging speed] option you choose, riding big miles will still require most owners to hang around for 45 minutes to an hour in order to brim a battery from most public fast charging outlets, which will feel too long for many, especially considering the highway range is only around 100 miles. That’s a stop every hour or so during those longer adventures.
Ride an hour and a half towards a fast charger, sit around for an hour. Ride an hour and a half towards a fast charger, sit around for an hour.
Yeah, no.
Good to take breaks when going long distances, it’s a good opportunity for business to pop up also. Make it the journey. Not the destination. Maybe if the charging is able to be dropped to 30 mins would be a better time.
I’d much rather do three hundred miles (like four and a half hours), fuel and break for twenty minutes, hit the road again. #TourerLife
It’s easy to charge less than your entire battery. Don’t run it empty and/or don’t charge it full. The top part of the capacity is going to be slow to charge anyway.
But an hour’s ride on one charge sounds like a very small battery, so it’s weird that the recharge would take that long.
That’s good in theory, but every hour across vast swaths of the US would be pretty boring. As it is most refuel stops are not places you wanna hangout at longer than you need to. That might shift slightly with more EVs requiring charges more often, but stopping every hour, for an hour to charge, isn’t gonna fly for most folks.
Apparently the range is another drawback, especially combined with the charging time.
I’m not sure if this applies to eMotorbikes, but I have seen how regular eBikes have made mobility open to folks who don’t really have a skillset or ethic or ability to ride and had to deal with that. Overall, I think this is good, but I want to see an increase in training offered. Folks can get hurt, or cause damage, or cause problems, in ways that other riders did not traditionally do so. Ultimately, I want to see more like this. They are quieter and will certainly have a smaller emissions impact at a local level.
How can I know if I’m riding an adventure motorcycle vs. a plain old non-adventure motorcycle?
The way your question is worded makes me think you’re not necessarily a rider but are just curious, or you’re a newer rider and haven’t gotten into these kinds of bikes yet. So if what I’m saying seems over-simplified obvious I apologize. I’m answering as accurately as I can for what I believe to be a less experienced rider. If I’m wrong, feel free to tell me and express any displeasure you have with my comment.
Imagine a triangle of sport bikes, cruiser/ touring bikes and dirt bikes. Sport bikes are light, fast, and have a very aggressive, and often uncomfortable riding position. Their job is to go very fast on well maintained, paved roadways.
Cruiser / touring bikes, are made to be comfortable and practical for long trips in a variety of weather, but still mostly on paved roads. Some are fast, most are kind of medium for speed and acceleration.
“Dirt bikes” are made to do well on anything other than pavement. Mud, first, gravel etc. They should be light weight, have good ground clearance for rocks and uneven terrain, have an upright riding position for visibility and leverage, and a lot of suspension travel for bumps and such.
I have a “Sport-tourer”, it can be very fast, somewhat light, and has a riding position between aggressive and sporty and upright and comfortable. It’s made for paved roads, and still has just enough room to put 2-3 days of clothes in storage. It’s in the middle of the sport to cruiser/touring leg of the triangle.
And Adventure bike is in the middle of the cruiser/touring to dirt bike leg of the triangle. You can carry clothes and such, have great off-road properties, stay on the light side. There are some fast adventure bikes, but the best ones understand that too much power can be a real downside off-road. It’s designed to use paved roads only to get you to the trails, plains, paths that you made the trip for in the first place, and let you stay there for a weekend.
Hope that’s helpful.
I think “not necessarily a rider” is a fair description.
An adventure motorbike is a different design than a non-adventure motorbike. They can be used on roads, but also work very well in off-road situations. Fender placement, suspension, and tires.
Its the new name for dual sport bikes
I’d say that adventure bikes are more like 70/30 road/dirt, and with greater cargo capacity, where dual sport is more 50/50. A fine distinction, but a distinction nonetheless.
And adventure bikes are usually comfortable enough to ride all day. A lot of dual sports are really road legal dirt bikes with a banana shaped seat. A light adventure bike and a heavy dual sport have a lot of overlap.
I move that we retain the old name. Who’s with me?
There’s physical differences though. If there’s a continuum in recreational motorcycle design, at one end are offroad only dirt bikes and at the other super sport MotoGP style crotch rockets, a dual sport is one step from a dirt bike, and an adventure bike is one more step. A dual sport is a dirt bike you can drive to the gas station, an adventure bike is basically a touring bike that won’t immediately fall over if you hit a patch of sand.
I second the motion.
