First Photos of the 2013 MotoCzysz E1pc

05/29/2013 @ 2:55 pm, by Jensen Beeler16 COMMENTS


Team Mugen has already shown off its new electric superbike, with the Japanese tuning firm looking to break the 110 mph barrier at the 2013 SES TT Zero event this year at the Isle of Man TT. To do that though, their rider John McGuinness will have to get past Mark Miller and Michael Rutter of the MotoCzysz team, which has won the past three years of the electric class at the TT.

While we still await the official debut of the 2013 MotoCzysz E1pc race bike, the Portland based company has given us a tease with a few photos on Twitter. This year’s bike takes some cues from the 2012 MotoCzysz E1pc that Rutter took to the winner’s circle last year (Miller finished third); but as expected for 2013, gone are all the aerodynamic winglets that we saw on the ’12 machine.

Talking to Michael Czysz last year during our test ride of the 2012 MotoCzysz E1pc, Czysz said this year his goal was to build a bike that retained many of the aerodynamic characteristics and innovations his team created, but was also more visually palatable for the common motorbiker.

As such, the elongated seat remains, which allows the riders to scoot back and lay flatter on the E1pc during the long straights of the Isle of Man’s Mountain Course. We also imagine the air-routing system seen on the 2012 bike remains in some form as well, though it is tough to see from the current photos, since we don’t have a good front-end picture.

What we do know is that MotoCzysz is aiming not only for another race win, but also a 110 mph average lap speed. Helping achieve that goal is the reported 20% of extra on-board battery power, which if the public spec’s of the E1pc can be believed, would bring the bike close to 17 kWh of on-board stored energy.

If you factor in the efficiency of an electric drivetrain over a petrol-based one, this means the 2013 MotoCzysz E1pc will be tackling the Mountain Course with the equivalent of about a gallon and a half of petrol. For reference, the internal combustion race bikes typically refuel after two laps on the Mountain Course, meaning MotoCzysz will have a tad less energy available on its single as the Superbike class rider does.

Another noticeable change is the absence of the MotoCzysz front-end with its oval sliders and single shock setup. Instead, MotoCzysz has gone a bit more conventional with a standard fork setup, though with a custom triple clamp, of the company’s own design (we hear MotoCzysz will be selling these soon).

More photos of the E1pc and news from The Rock as we get it. Until then, we wish the MotoCzysz crew all the best on the Isle of Man TT this year, and send good thoughts to Michael as he will unfortunately miss this year’s round as he continues his fight with cancer.




Source: MotoCzysz (Twitter)

  • monkeyfumi

    Ohlins forks?
    What happened to their own front end?

  • They’re still sorta running their own front end with conventional forks. Don’t have all the details, but the triple clamp is highly adjustable and designed by MotoCzysz.

  • alex

    Feels like they took a step back with the conventional design elements – not a step forward. Still though the increase of 3kwhr and other changes makes me wonder if we’ll see a 120 lap this year.

  • I think a 120 mph lap is going to take at least a 20 kWh pack, and more importantly a 100 lbs reduction in weight. Remember, that’s Supersport lap time territory. The electrics have the horsepower, but are still close to 500 lbs. What does a race-ready 600cc bike weigh?

  • I’m shocked that they gave up on their highly touted oval forks with single shock setup. I’m wondering if this is an admission that those forks aren’t as good as conventional forks, or if, for some reason, MotoCzysz decided that they badly needed to use the space under the tank where the single shock resided for something else (more batteries?)

    I’m also surprised by the lack of winglets. If they provided an advantage last year, why wouldn’t they also provide an advantage this year? The excuse that they want the bike to look more mainstream is garbage. In racing, the old adage is that if you find that you go faster with a Barbie lunchbox welded to your dashboard, you run with a Barbie lunchbox welded to your dashboard.

  • paulus – Thailand

    Best wishes to Michael Czysz for his personal battle….
    Big respect to MotoCzysz for putting it out there and doing something to contribute to the sport/future of motorcycling.

  • The EPA rates 33.7kWh = 1 US gal. of gasoline. It is solid math, not made up crap. So how does 17kWh = 1.5 gals? And what does motor efficiency have to do with how much energy is on board? It does say something for the petrol bikes that they can make 2 laps on 6gals (maybe more). That makes the TT Zero bikes only 2X as efficient instead of the normal 3X-4X.

  • Darn it now I’m doing it! At a 1/2 a gallon for one lap vs 3 gals for the petrol bikes, that makes the TTZero 6X as efficient.

  • The math isn’t hard on this one.

    33.7 kWh = 1 gallon of fuel, as you stated.

    Electric drivetrains are roughly 3x more efficient with energy use than ICE, so in terms of work done, 11.23 kWh of battery is on par with 1 gallon of petrol.

    11.23 / 17 = 1.513, so 17 kWh of battery is roughly equivalent to 1.5 gallons of gasoline on a motorcycle.

    Assuming the ICE bikes are empty when they stop for their pitstops, and have 4 gallon tanks, that means a typical ICE bike on the Mountain Course uses 2 gallons of fuel (one pitstop is normal on a four lap race, 2 pitstops on a 6 lapper).

  • TheSwede

    Beeler’s got it right. Yay maths!

  • Hmmm. The Tyco Suzuki GSXR1000 have 24l tanks = 6.34 US Gallons. So ~ 3 US gallons per lap.

    Yet again, aerodynamics are critical on a vehicle with limited energy and high average speeds. So it’s disappointing that nobody is really taking advantage of the relaxed bodywork rules compared with the ICE machines. I kind of understand both Mugen and Motoczysz wanting to not appear to extreme, and also to be suitable and not too strange for people like Rutter and McGuiness to ride flat out. But it’s still disappointing.

  • protomech

    Just another anecdote on comparing gas and electric.

    I get around 126 Wh/mile at the wall to ride my Zero. Most riding done at 45-55 mph. Assume 90% charging efficiency, yields 110 Wh/mile at the battery.

    I would compare that to 60 mpg in a small 250cc supermoto-styled gas bike.

    1 gal / 60 miles = 33.7 kWh (thermal, LHV petrol) / 60 miles = 561 Wh (thermal) / mile

    Comparable electric is 110 Wh (electric)/mile at the battery. So about 5x as efficient.

    1 gal of gas will take a comparable bike about 60 miles, I need 6.6 kWh from the battery to do the same. 7.3 kWh from the wall, at $0.085/kWh (North AL pricing) = $0.62/gal equivalent.

    The comparable efficiencies of gas and electric will both vary based upon load and RPM. Gas engines will be more efficient under moderate to heavy load – eg race conditions. Efficiency may be more like 3-4x then for electric.

    With 17 kWh, onboard energy is roughly equivalent to 1.5 – 2.5 gallons of gasoline. Probably closer to 1.5 gallons at race pace.

  • buellracerx

    Another interesting point – not all chemical energy in a battery is available for conversion to electric. Liquid fuels are good to the last drop. I wonder, do they (teams, mfg’s, etc.) advertise the actual, consumable energy on board or is it the total chemical energy? All this coming from an IC engines guy, so take it with a grain of salt.

  • Added another photo, this time of the front-end. Very similar to the 2011 bike.

  • Dewey

    Why the switch to a conventional telefork if the bike was a winner last year with the alternative front?
    Rules? At the request of the rider?

  • The flex unit from the forks has been moved into the triple clamp. Same tech in theory, different way of applying it. One advantage with the conventional forks is being able to tap into the deep experience in setting up those suspension pieces.