A ride-worthy electric?
Dec 21st, 2009 by Leo
Here’s an electric that I’d be willing to ride: from the winners of the TTXGP…a street-able electric sportbike. It’s good looking. It seems to handle well (from what we can tell). It has a decent range for the track or around the city riding – and you can customize it to your needs… But it’s expensive, at close to $40k – you have to think of it as the Tesla for bikes. For more info check out the Mavizen website.
Related posts:
I couldn’t find information on its top speed and range. That’s certainly a good-looking bike, though.
I think that once someone develops a practical electric motorcycle (automatic transmission, top speed of 90mph and a range of 100 miles) a lot more riders will take up the sport.
And if NYC makes itself more biker-friendly with dedicated bike parking, and allowing us top use the car-pool lane, we’ll solve a significant portion of this city’s traffic problems.
Yeah… And don’t get me started on the city’s anti-motorcycle ways… This winter they seem bent on harassing scooters – meanwhile they can’t provide viable public trans outside Manhattan…
Anyway the claimed top speed for the bike – or at least the Team Agni model (in the TTXGP) was 120 mph acc. to http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/498/3734/Motorcycle-Article/2009-Isle-of-Man-TT-TTXGP-Results.aspx
It’s a moot point with a price tag of $40k. There’s nothing green about that. Buy a used fossil-fuel bike of equivalent spec and donate the difference to your local tree-huger organization. Your carbon footprint would be greatly reduced because no one built a motorcycle. Construction of the vehicle itself is vastly more damaging that its operation.
Coupled with the decreased functionality (limited refueling options, zero logistical support, etc.), there’s no reason to ride this thing.
I want an electric motorcycle. It just needs to look like a motorcycle and work like a motorcycle without costing me as much as a house.
“Construction of the vehicle itself is vastly more damaging than its operation” — Do you mean because of the batteries?
Yeah 40k is too pricey to make it anything other than a novelty at this point. Unless…you plan to race in the TTXGP, in which case $40k isn’t bad for a competitive race entry.
It’s the development, production and shipping of raw materials, operation of the factory, and shipping of the finished product. Environmentally speaking, a used Civic in good working order kicks the tar out of a factory-fresh Prius.
Here is the same argument we hear every day about hybrid and electric technology, but with something simpler and less emotional in place of cars and motorcycles:
1. Killing trees is bad
2. Buying paper cups kills trees.
/:. Buying paper cups is bad
1. Buying paper cups is bad.
2. You won’t buy paper cups if you buy a porcelain cup.
/:. You won’t do a bad thing if you buy a porcelain cup.
The problem with this argument is that it makes the unstated assumption that buying a porcelain cup isn’t bad for the environment. The impact of one coffee mug is actually equivalent to that of around a thousand paper cups. Here’s the whole argument:
1. Killing trees is bad
2. Buying paper cups kills trees.
/:. Buying paper cups is bad
1. Buying paper cups is bad.
2. You won’t buy paper cups if you buy a porcelain cup.
3. Buying a porcelain cup isn’t bad. (false)
/:. You won’t do a bad thing if you buy a porcelain cup. (false)
This is a marketing scheme designed to create a consumer who will be happy spending ten dollars on a product when they could have gotten something better for two-fifty. The environmental, fiscal, and social costs should all be considered included in that analogy.
I often hear people argue, “If we don’t support this, they’ll stop making hybrid cars.” It is probably true that if we support fossil fuels and not emerging tech, then fossil fuels will remain dominant until we run out of oil. This is a false dilemma, however. There is a third option. One can buy used. Buying used will force manufacturers to innovate rather than placate. It will force the them to put their money into R&D instead of marketing.
The only way we as consumers ever really get any say is by voting with our dollar. It’s important that we know what we are voting for out there.