Talk:Z Electric Vehicle

January 2014

I created this page as a stub, using four or five news articles as sources. We still need some pictures to illustrate it, and as the weeks go by, a more thorough description of the scooters would be useful.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 19:54, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Notability

I should probably nominate this for deletion at WP:AfD and I wouldn't be surprised if someone else does just that. For now I've tagged it for {{notability}}, since the best source is a blog post at Gizmag. Dealernews is semi-reliable but doesn't establish notability, since they generally are a conduit for press releases only, not unlike Gizmag. Without significant, sustained coverage in independent sources, the article fails Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). I'm skeptical that ZEV is in fact a manufacturer. Dealernews calls them a "distributor" and it appears that they put together rebranded Chinese scooters from knock down kits. A quality source -- Cycle World, Motorcycle Consumer News, the LA Times, the New York Times, etc. could serve to verify their claim to actually designing and building their scooters. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughtful approach. I will look for a news source confirming ZEV is a manufacturer, which I understand they are. I believe their webpage points out that Mr. Zehrbach designs the scooters himself; the articles do confirm ZEV builds their own special hub-motors which is the heart of the scooter. I do not know about other parts like headlights or brakes. But I think their competitor Vectrix also imports parts (from Poland). Come to think of it the electric motorcycle makers like Brammo boast of imported parts, like Italian brakes. In any event I too would like to see more coverage; I would especially like to see a major magazine comparison test the boast of "fastest, longest range," etc.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 21:38, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Just to reply to the point above: Powersports Business is considered a quality source in those circles, and that article was an interview by a respected regular reporter, not a press release. The interviewer included the following quotes from Mr. Zehrbach:

“I started seeing the electric bikes that were being used in Asia and looking like the scooters that were being brought into the United States by various importers. I said ‘These things aren’t very good. We can do a whole lot better than that,’” Zehrbach related. “So we sat down, designed and built [the first ZEV bike] and started taking orders on it.”

--and--

“The big deal was concentrating on building a better motor, a better controller and a better chassis. The chassis was different than anybody else had for a scooter,” Zehrbach explained. “My scooter has to handle like a sport bike, so that’s what we did. We put a really rigid flame that has no deflection, and you can really honk it around the corners, just like you would a sport bike. The parts are all tucked up high so you can get stupid lean angles and have a great time.”

From this I conclude that Z Electric Vehicle is both a manufacturer, and distributer, of an original product. They design and build their own. They do not put together rebranded Chinese scooters. That is only a partial answer to the concerns raised above, but it is a start.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 22:04, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Who has the largest/longest?

Range, that is. Yes I agree "ZEV says" is better wording for that sentence in the lede. I would love to see a range/speed comparison by something like Consumer Reports. I will continue to send them letters asking for that. Though I am not a subscriber nor an advertiser, my clout with them is pretty limited.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 22:34, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Part of the problem is that manufacturers who think they might look bad will not provide free test vehicles to Cycle World, Motorcyclist, Rider, Motor Cycle News, etc. So no free test bike means no test. Consumer Reports buys their own test vehicles, but they can't afford to buy many electric bikes very often, since they are such a tiny slice of the overall automotive market. There are many such categories where we might never have good objective comparisons to test manufacturer claims. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:12, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that does make sense. Also there is the possibility that special-interest magazines tend to take little notice of a company that does not advertise. Money rules in that area of journalism. cf. This example of advertisers enforcing their party line on a gun magazine. Zev is doing almost no publicity; no advertising so far as I can tell. As a result, as one writer rightly says "[t]hough high-end electric motorcycles are getting their due, the “Z” EV line is virtually unknown." If the late lamented Vectrix spent too much on Italian trade shows, slick websites, and P.R.--rather than nuts and bolts and customer service--it may well be Zev is spending too little. Not my call of course.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 11:38, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

PS--Here is another, direct and outrageous example of a glossy major motorcycle magazine firing a writer, Dexter Ford, because of advertisers' pressure. Ford is now freelancing for the New York Times. So one might rethink the assumption that a slick and glossy motorcycle magazine is a badge of credibility. In fact they kowtow to advertisers and ignore non-advertisers. The dull staid but uncorrupted trade magazines, and "old grey ladies" like the New York times have the more objective reporting.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 13:51, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Further to the reliable test issue, an online magazine entity called something like Green Vehicle reports may (I hope) be able to supply an independent test. Look at the comments under their 2014 buyers guide, hereElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 19:09, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Motorcycle testing and measurement is intended to be the article where we can inform readers of the caveats and limitations of testing reported by 'reliable' sources in Wikipedia articles. I'd like to see that article significantly expanded to tell the whole story.

There are many ways tests can be calibrated differently or can be based on different assumptions or definitions. And there's always a degree of corruption in the process. I think List of fastest production cars goes too far in excluding all tests prior to WWII, as if the level of graft and corruption after that time was marginally improved enough to be acceptable but before it was too unreliable. For me the goal is to report what we've had and make sure we explain why you should take that with a grain of salt. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:50, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks I had not before seen that interesting Wiki-article, Motorcycle testing and measurement (Dexter Ford is cited in one of the first footnotes). I agree the article could well be expanded, to offer that necessary grain of salt. I am not sure how to phrase it in a neutral way. Incidentally I am not completely sure Mr. Ford isn't guilty of the same bias that caused his editors to fire him from Motorcyclist Magazine. That is, Mr. Ford runs an ad agency in Los Angeles whose clients are electric motorcycle companies. So his recent Zero motorcycle evaluation in the New York Times might raise the question: is Zero one of his clients? Not that his evaluation is skewed, or that he wrote a piece of puffery; merely that his choice of which brand to evaluate. . . . well, the question does arise. ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 15:58, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Criminal Convictions of ZEV's founder, Darus Zehrbach

I am sorry to say I've concluded that I must include what the federal Fourth Circuit in 2004 described as "crimes involving financial dishonesty" by Mr. Zehrbach. Mr. Zehrbach founded ZEV and the company bears his name; he gives interviews about its products; he is involved in marketing and sales as well as engineering; he is the first contact for prospective customers. Readers therefore need to know that Mr. Zehrbach was convicted in two different federal courts on two different occassions. This parallels Wikipedia's treatment of the DeLorean DMC-12, which mentions the company founder's cocaine related arrests (he was acquitted). My own reading of Mr. Zehrbach's federal cases (this is personal opinion) persuades me that the first time--a bankruptcy fraud conviction-- Mr. Zehrbach may not have fully understood or realized, that collusion with other bidders at a bankruptcy auction crossed a line into criminal behavior. He is an engineer and entrepreneur, not a lawyer. Although on the other hand, it must be said he ignored the advice of a lawyer that the transaction as it stood was probably illegal. The court rejected Mr. Zehrbach's defense of lack of intent. I do not know what to make of Mr. Zehrbach's second conviction years later, of defrauding prospective buyers of kit aircraft engines that did not yet exist. Given what happened with Vectrix, which continued to take orders when they could not possibly fulfil them--I see no alternative but to post this information. Otherwise Wikipedia too is chargeable with failure to tell prospective customers of crimes involving financial dishonesty. Prospective buyers of Z Electric Vehicles can take measures to safeguard their financial dealings--so long as they are aware they need to do so.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 00:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

A single-purpose editor under the nom de plume "Manicpursuit" attempted to blow smoke, blaming the conviction(s) on a deceased grandfather. Sorry: the news reports give the age of the Darus Zehrbach who was convicted. It wasn't the grandfather. Doubtless it is frustrating that an unfortunate past impinges upon a hardworking present. Presuming this single-purpose POV editor may have something to do with ZEV and might even be named Zehrbach, may I offer these words: escrow account. Customers put their money into escrow to be released upon delivery. That obviates concerns about financial finagling. And having ZEV itself suggest that procedure, will give ZEV credibility.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 20:15, 3 August 2016 (UTC)