News broke last week that Stark Future is releasing an “enduro” electric motorcycle based on its Varg motocross (MX) variant. The new Varg “EX” is supposed to be street legal, carry a charge for about 6 hours of ride time, weigh 264 pounds, pulls with 60 ponies, and sets the buyer back $12,900 ($13,900 gets you 80HP).
Stark has thus far capitalized where Alta seemed to fall flat. A close friend of mine recently sold his 300 two-stroke woods bike and bought a Stark; telling me it’s one of the most impressive bikes he’s ever owned. That’s high praise considering over 100 motorcycles have passed through his hands.
After years of empty promises from EV companies, I’m highly doubtful of range numbers considering the complex myriad of factors that dictate the real-world outcomes. I will say that I’m skeptically optimistic, if this new Enduro bike can pull 4 or more hours of “dual-sport” riding in eastern Kentucky, I’ll be the first to sing its praises. That said, beyond skepticism, my biggest concern with EV motorcycles is that up until now the industry’s marketing people seem to have missed the plot. Electric is not, and will not, be a direct replacement for internal combustion. EV is an alternative flavor of “fun”, with its own pros and cons.
Stop pretending
Bookmark this post, as I hope I’m wrong. Considering that electric cars date back to 1888 (the Flocken Elektrowagen), if not before, the narrative of “once battery technology advances” rings hollow. Gasoline is 13 times more energy dense than batteries by volume; hence the whole range problem; more batteries for more range is more weight which requires more batteries, reaching a point of diminishing returns. Expecting a more efficient, yet profoundly less energy-dense locomotive solution to be a direct replacement to an existing infrastructure isn’t impossible, but highly improbable considering the hurdles of chemistry and physics.
That said, electric has massive torque, emissions, and sound pollution advantages over internal combustion engines (ICE). Marketing folks should playing to those strengths instead of trying to beat ICE motorcycles at their own game. Electric vehicles have massive potential to penetrate areas that have recently closed or are off-limits to ICE vehicles; indoor and urban locations immediately come to mind. Inflating the range numbers based on the most ideal use-case is a losing battle; it’s time to focus on where electric clearly wins.
Silence is golden
Not long ago, I published a review of the SUPER73 R-Brooklyn. That review covers lots of the advantages of the e-bike “hybrid” powersports space; a years later, that segment has become more popular with the likes of the Talaria MX5, Surron Storm bee, Zero XB, and now the Varg EX. Understandably, there’s a heap of regulatory red tape that e-bikes must to overcome, however, it doesn’t change the fact that the door is now open for e-powersports in noise-ordnance-riddled urban spaces that have long since policed motorized activities out of town. Dayton currently has a significant number of abandoned public parks and golf courses. These areas, and certainly more around the country, are prime locations to rebuild a motorsports community in more population-dense areas, without offending the neighbors (Look up “Electrek Valley Bike Park”).
Now, if you engage in an online discussion about a new e-bike, without fail, you’ll hear the proverbial shout from the back, “I can’t live without the SOUND of a motorcycle”. That’s fine, we’ll always have those people, however, it’s undeniable that silence is a massive selling point for electric bikes. The ability to “hear traction” and get up close and personal with nature is something I want with a dedicated woods machine. I’ve endured countless negative dog and deer encounters thanks to my two-stroke; I’d much rather be in a position where I have the element of surprise for once. Blending in with nature, whilst hearing the front tire letting loose before a low-side crash is a superpower.
Horsepower is impossible without torque
…and electric has buckets of both. Near instantaneous torque is what makes electric so addicting; dank nooners and effortless climbs, electric motors put power to the back wheel, right bloody now. That’s the whole purpose of motor controllers, to smooth the power delivery output of the motor so that it’s usable. Personally, I’d like to see most of these bikes with a hand-operated rheostat… er “clutch”, but we’ll save that argument for a different article. The point is, electric bikes have the potential to excel in the most difficult terrain (like trials), and especially in artificial man-made terrain indoors, offering more access to more riders. Simultaneously, there’s an argument to be made about electric bikes being “cleaner” when confronting the gnarliest of outdoor natural terrain. If the industry is serious about being a force of change, we need more people like Taddy Blazuzuak competing in the gnarly races on an E-moto.
The headwinds
At the risk of being the economic doom-dealer, recession is on the horizon, if not already here. KTM’s trouble isn’t the disease, it’s a symptom. Thanks to the events of 2020, we’ve had a euphoric “boom” in the moto industry. The bust is waiting in the wings; it’s a matter of when. This week I saw a brand new ’24 GasGas 250 two-stroke enduro on sale for $6,800. That bike retails over $10k. I made a profit on my enduro 2-stroke when I sold it in 2022, today I could almost buy a brand new one with those proceeds. Stark is asking double that price for a new Varg EX. Surron wants $4,400 for a “light bee” (hybrid e-bike), and $8500 for their new Storm Bee (E-motocrosser). OEMs dealing in petrol-powered toys are slashing prices to move inventory, and but EV is asking a premium for their new technology. The good news is that considering the limited supply from companies like Stark, they’ll probably get it. However, depending on how deep the consumer gets cut over the next 2-5 years, they may not.
The internet is covered with articles about the failure of Brammo, Alta, Cake, Fuell, and Energica. Many of these companies failed in “good times”, how will electric motorcycle companies fare in hard times? I reiterate, these companies must stop trying to compete in the range department, but illustrate how electric is different, and where electric is clearly better. Moreover, by orders of magnitude, motorcycles sell on sex appeal, not their stat sheet. Simultaneously, if you can get the same number of smiles per hour, at half the price for new, and even less for used, these premium electric bikes have a tall mountain to climb. This may not matter in “good times”, but economic winter is most certainly coming.
I think Stark “has the stuff”; thus far they’ve continued to impress on all fronts. Ideally, the owners are personally invested and will weather the storm. To my surprise, Zero has held on the longest thus far, more impressive considering sex appeal is not remotely their strength. Their new XB fits exactly into my playbook (although it looks oddly familiar to a Surron…), so hopefully they’re re-baking the formula to play to EV’s strength, while the off-road segment is still growing.
Do think the electric motorcycle segment has the bright future the marketing people claim or is it just the newest thing when folks have cash to spend?
Moto Adventurer 
I love what you have to say here, especially the point that electric has the clear advantage in certain areas of the market, and that is where manufacturers should focus their efforts. When my current commuter bike (CFMoto 650 Adventura) dies, I can easily see replacing it with a Zero or the new Kawasaki electric Ninja.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This news came out today about another ICE powersports brand
https://www.bizjournals.com/rhodeisland/news/2024/12/18/textron-to-shut-down-powersports-unit.html
LikeLike
Switcheroo, torque is impossible w/o power. In a reciprocating engine, fuel is burned that coverts its potential energy to heat. Thermodynamics says when that happens in a container, pressure go up and piston go down. Same thing happens when you eat your Wheaties and pedal a bicycle. You are not “torquey.” You are providing Wheaties power to a pedal or a wrench or whatever. The length of from the fulcrum of the spinny bit to the point on the crank or pedal where the force from the piston or foot getting forced down creates the torque at the crank. If you really want a surprise, look at a physic’s book to see the torque vector created. It’s actually along the axis of the crank!
So why does this matter? We don’t even use anything to measure this crank torque. It’s a simple calculation done by a dyno from the output power that approximates the torque at the crank.
Crank Tq = (output power (rear wheel) * 5252)/engine rpm
If you want the torque at the rear wheel, you would divide by the rear wheel rpm instead of the engine rpm. That would be the actual torque at the rear wheel as that’s where you’re actually measuring the power. Gear dependent.
Works the same way in an electric motor except rather than the input power being fuel converted to heat it’s the current * voltage supplied to an electric motor. The output power of the final drive is still torque*rpm/5252 in hp.
So if torque is the be all, end all of fun, why don’t we all shift at peak crank torque? Because we’d get smoked by our buddies. Power causes motorcycles to accelerate. In a rotational system, torque is a component of that power to the rear wheel, but rpm is equally important. As long as the product of torque and rpm are increasing, the motorcycle will continue to accelerate.
What makes electric torque special? Yes it comes on from just north of zero rpm, but 200 ft lbs of torque * 1 rpm/5252 = 0.04 hp. You’re not going to leave any Busa’s supplying 0.04 hp to the rear wheel.
The beauty of the output curves is that mathematically, linear power creates a flat torque curve. Just the way the math works, plot it at your leisure. The torque curve is really superfluous. The power curve tells you everything you need to know and linear power is perfection. That’s why Sport modes on bikes is retarded. Rather than having perfect linearity of supply 5% of throttle to get 5% of output power or 20% of throttle to get 20% of power in perfectly modulatable harmony, we get 40% of throttle crammed into the first 2% of throttle travel. The mfgs might as well just remove the throttle and give us a light switch.
LikeLike
You’ve beautifully defined my point: HP is a unit of measurement derived from torque. RPM and angular force are measurable actions. 5252 is an arbitrary number. I get it, this is semantics, my point being that torque is typically what people enjoy, but they call it “power”. HP is made by an engine spinning faster.
LikeLike
You’re still looking at it backwards. The POWER from burning the fuel turns the crank handle to create both torque and rpm. Without POWER, you have no torque or rpm.
Torque tells you nothing without rpm. It takes 100x more power to create 1 unit of torque at 1 rpm than it takes to make 1 unit of torque at 100 rpm. If you know the torque and the rpm, you know the power. The chart of the power tells you everything there is to know about the output of the engine.
What you are feeling as a biker is not torque, power, or rpm. What we feel is acceleration. We humans don’t even have a natural fear of speed as we didn’t evolve to fear it. Granny can get on a jet moving 350 mph and never bat an eye. We evolved to fear acceleration as when it changes rapidly from falling, it hurts.
Think of an engine like electricity. Power = current * voltage. You can walk around in your house and build up 50,000 volts that will discharge when you touch the door handle. Can you supply the electricity from your socks to charge your Tesla? No. Why not? Because there is almost no power there. While the voltage (or torque) is huge, the power that dragging your feet caused is miniscule. Consequently, there’s no current to charge your Tesla’s battery full of electrons.
In electricity, a transformer serves the same function as a gear box in a mechanical system. The transformer changes the ratio of current to voltage from the POWER supply to serve some purpose. Maybe you want to transfer POWER down a transmission line. To minimize your IR (current resistance) losses, you maximize the voltage and minimize the current. So say we have a 50 kW power supply. We might use a transformer to create 50 kV @ 1 amp to drive the transmission line. At the other end, say we want to weld metal together. Then, we use another transformer to change the ratio of POWER from the power supply to 1 V @ 50 kA to power the arc welder. The POWER from the supply is what it is, the transformer simply alters the ratio of the power’s components i.e. current and voltage.
An engine does the same thing with the small exception that it produces variable POWER across a range of rpms. The gear box, like the transformer, changes the ratio of the POWER’s components i.e. torque and rpm. If you have 100 units of POWER, you can create first gear to create 100 units of torque @ 1 rpm to move two fat dirtbags on a motorsickle off the line w/o stalling. Once you have momentum, you might change the gear ratio such that your 100 units of POWER creates 1 unit of torque and 100 rpm to maximize your speed. The POWER is doing the heavy lifting. Using a gear box changes the ratio ratio of the POWER’s components to fulfill a need.
Decades of misinformation have led to motorcyclists believing that engine’s create torques at low rpms and horsiepowers at high rpm. As if the engine was doing something up to some magic rpm, then doing something else above that rpm. It’s nonsense that I’ve been trying to debunk for years but most have no hope of ever understanding. I picked you to bore with this because I’m confident you have the chops to take this home.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks. We can agree to disagree as we are arguing about semantics, power vs energy and so forth. I too have done the math. To your point, this is a very difficult topic to explain through text, especially metaphoric story telling for the entertainment of others. The point is purely that electric motors can apply torque to the ground superior to ICE machines.
LikeLiked by 1 person
On that we agree, but electrics have to start from zero rpm. Assume that an electric motor is 100% efficient. The output power equals the input power. At low speed the motor is outputting very little power (like shuffling your feet in socks). ICE can rev up the engine and drop the clutch to whatever degree it takes for the tire to put down the max power available w/o spinning it.
Perfectly linear power wrt rpm equals a flat torque curve
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/docs/documents/1503/electric_motor_speed_vs_torque_power.png
Note the input/output power starts at zero.
Now take a Busa, rev it up and dump the clutch at 5k rpm. Suddenly, you’re coming off the line with 80 hp to the pavement.
https://bsd.uk.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/BUSSA-FOR-WEB.bmp
Energy and power aren’t semantics. Energy can measured in calories as potential energy (fuel) and power is measured as calories converted to heat per unit time.
If I have 100 units of power, I can make 100 units of torque @ 1 rpm
If I have 200 units of power, I can make 200 units of torque @ 1 rpm
or I can make 100 units of torque @ 10 rpm
At any given engine rpm, the more power I make, the bigger the torque at the crank will be. If you peddle a bicycle harder you will create more torque and rpm at the rear wheel.
See the Busa graph to verify. Whenever the upgraded Busa line is making more power than the stock Busa line, it’s also making more torque than the stock Busa too, right?
Torque is superfluous to motorcyclists. The power curve tells you everything about the output power of an engine that there is to know. If one engine has more area under its power curve than another, it makes more total power and thus will win a race in the long run…if that kind of thing is of interest to people.
For fun, If you want to know a crank torque value at any given ENGINE rpm on the Busa’s dyno, simply multiply the power by 5252 at the corresponding rpm, then divide by that rpm. That’s how a dyno machine calculates an approximation to the engine’s crank torque. If you can calculate the crank torque from the output power and engine’s rpm plots, the torque provides you no new information.
The point I’m making is that power creates torque and rpm in a rotational system. Torque does not create power.
LikeLike
A couple other thoughts came to mind. Just as power creates torque & rpm in a rotational system and power creates current & voltage in an electrical system, power also creates heat & pressure in a thermodynamic system (think combustion chamber) and power creates pressure & flow in a hydraulic or pneumatic system (think pump).
In all cases, both components of power must be created or power was not spent. You can have a million joules of energy in a cloud creating an enormous voltage between itself and the earth. Until current in the form of lightening flows, no power is generated. Similarly, you could lean on the handle of a wrench and apply 50 lbs of force creating a torque at the bolt. Until the bolt starts rotating though, physics says zero power has been delivered…and the fat dirtbags never go anywhere.
LikeLike