making a petition to change the law on electric bikes?

Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
797
Location
Rhone-Alpes
it is madness that the technology is available to make a 40 kg electric bike that can travel 100 miles in between charges at 50mph, and the industry is unable to make any because of legal limitations.

Our governments, in America and in Europe and the rest of the world, should be encouraging alternative energy and alternative transport by making a new sector of vehicles called heavy electric bikes, which have the same licence category as mopeds, needing a certain age and a mandatory biking helmet, and that have small wing mirrors.

I wouldn't mind signing some petitions that denounce how the current laws are counter-productive to alternative energy, and that there should be a new class of vehicles for adults like light electric mopeds-

What do you reckon of the details of such a law if it could be put in place to allow fast electric bikes of some kind to adults with road sense?
 
Depending on your location, you are controlled by state law and/or ordinance. The folks who know can see you get what you want.
Fort Collins has some electric bikes for the police department. The high speed bikes (motorcycles) may replace their bigger road bikes some day. Those officers who ride for a living, will develop the criteriae, you can count on that. They kept Harley-Davidson in business for decades. They'll be the ones to adopt the form for the states.
 
the bikes would have to have ADR approved tires brakes and lighting which would add to the 'pulled out of a hat' 40kg weight of yours.. plus undergo some sort of safety crash test.. all could be done but its an expensive process for a company that may only sell a dozen bikes.. they might as well make an electric motorcycle/moped/scooter and take the extra battery space for longer distances and faster speeds, which is what they are doing..

for the DIY'er under those rules it would be probably easier to pick up a decent second hand motorcycle with a rooted engine cheaper than a good quality DH bike then have to upgrade the brakes tires and lights..

i don't know where you are from but in Australia we have a 250watt limit.. 250watts is good for someone with a disability that cant pedal themselves but for an able bodied person 250watt barely makes up for the extra 15kg of motor/battery your carrying around..

i don't mind the 250watt limit as they have no real way of testing it so i ignore it.. but i would rather they set a speed limit for all bicycles maybe around 40kmh or maybe a percentage of the roads speed limit which i think is sensible as your riding near the side of the road your going to need more time to react to a pedestrian jumping out in front of you..
 
Historically, when people just do the right thing, regardless of what the folks who live fear-based lives want (lawmakers), the law eventually gets discarded for the rubbish it is.

So many examples of this from pre-Christ times all the way up to modern day (like WA and CO just legalizing weed for recreational use).

Do the right thing, if some poor fool feels its his duty to punish you, immediately go back to doing the right thing, and encourage others to do the right thing as well.

By "the right thing", I of course mean using the worlds lowest impact, lowest harms, lowest harm potential form of transportation that can suit your transportation needs (an ebike built to your speed/power tastes).
 
^--- +1

I bet they tried all sorts of dumb crap to regulate motorcycles too. But motorcycles got grandfathered in to an extent, because they came before cars.

You'd think that eBikes were more dangerous than motorcycles though, considering how the law has treated them in many countries.
 
The problem with ebikes is that they do not require a license and many idiots would hop on one and treat it like a bicycle and get in trouble.

All we really need is to be allowed to register out ebikes as mopeds. I'm installing turn signals next week, I use one mirror. Brake light would be a good idea too. None of which would add much weight.

But the other problem is that mopeds are affected by traffic just as much as a motorcycle or automobile - you can't in any way legally pass clogged up cagers who take up 90% of the space on the road. So even if we are legal as mopeds, we lose a big advantage.

They make electric scooters, I test rode a 160lb Emax. It was comparable in performance to my ebike. Fun, a bit underpowered though, for not being able to ride bike lanes and such.


When I look at cyclists as a group, I'm almost ashamed to be part of them sometimes. It's made up a so many different types of people, many who do stupid things.


Overall, I think it's fine how things are in the US. I somethings go 30+mph and don't get stopped. I mostly stay in the low 20s for efficiency though. It's very important that I can hop on a sidewalk and bypass congestion. out in the burbs, I'm sure it doesn't matter and having a faster bike would make more sense.
 
liveforphysics said:
Historically, when people just do the right thing. . . the law eventually gets discarded for the rubbish it is.

As much as I wish I could agree with that, I'll just say that's really isn't true. Right now cities are falling over themselves to put in place recycling laws that are highly disruptive of recycling efforts, not only for political pompousity but to jab little fees in there they can collect, such as the People's Republic of Santa Monica illegally rewarding themselves with 10 cents per bag in pocket money, contrary to Federal Law which forbids it. That will never go away, neither will local laws against recycling polystyrene. I'll never understand where they came up with THAT stupid idea. But it'll remain law.

With my truck out of action for a week, I've spent a lot of time on my Voy and my Dash; neither truly suitable transportation but with my Pagsta unreliable for starting without a prime I'm stuck renting a car to get far from home, walking or taking the little bikes close by. A really good law would REQUIRE that there be electric bikes that can get us uphill and flow with traffic that would be legal. Good luck with that. I think a lot of your laws against them are to suit those who don't want to ride such a thing themselves; keep them unsuitable and we all have the excuse. If I understand it, that Voy was only $400 in 2007 and it has lights, blinkers, all around well packaged. A motor that suited my useage wouldn't have cost much more, there's even a port to add a 2nd batterypack. We teeder on the brink of effective shortrange electric cycling, but don't expect the politicians to help get us to the tipping point.

wtf-pics-29.jpg
 
Even moped laws are often too limiting. 25 or sometimes 30 mph. Then you just get the same shit from the cars, pass you then hook a right, etc. Whee, I get to hit cars at a faster speed now! I don't know what the answer is. Maybe a 20 mph speed is not so unreasonable if allowed on bike trails, but enough power to climb a hill at 20 would not be so dumb. 1500w perhaps?

What many need is really a flyweight motorcylce. Nothing less is going to keep up in a 45 mph zone. I don't know about 40kg, but by 50-60kg you can have a stiffer frame, and some dot tires and rims and 10 mile range at speed easily. 100-120 pounds is freaking light for a motorcycle! Lights and mirrors need not weigh much these days. Then it's just a matter of how much range do you choose to carry determining the final weight. I think Zero is on the right track.

But it's not a bike by that point, never will be a bike, and will never be as unregulated as a bike. But doing what's right is still the way to go, to effect change. Your personal level of doing what's right will vary from others. In any case, get on the bike/flyweight motorcycle and ride it!

Only by being out there on the street will changes, good for you or bad for you personally, happen.
 
Sans any organization representing our interests, future laws and education about this technology will be a crap shoot. Maybe pinhead politicians will figure it out but doubtful.

On the rare chance that some politico might actually look for practical information I think an association of eBike Riders might be in position to help define "voluntary" rules of operation and eBike standards based on real life as opposed to whatever the lobbyists' desire.

Take the metal detector crowd - they constantly face being blocked from access to prime areas and often demonized as maurauders and pirates hell bent on raping historical artifacts.

Some of these folks organized non-profit association which spells out what they really do and provide informational resources (sorta what happens here) to become good citizens in the fight for our freedom to enjoy life and our practically harmless activity.

A list of rules & bylaws might lend some credibility to us as a group? Many of these associations already exist be it musical styles or off-roading groups, astronomy, bird watching, etc. Something to help look official and perhaps become a database for future legislation to refer when formulating laws of the land?

I'm not much of a crusader but I'd contribute a few dollars per year and agree to "rules & bylaws" created by a collective think-tank of regular users to get something like this rolling.

If we don't do something, they're gonna do it for us....
 
I like the fact that we are pretty much Stealth right now.

People riding E-bikes are pretty rare, I've only encounter them once in a great while. This pretty much keeps us off the list of things to bust, legislate, tax... Plus, since no one is paying us much attention right now, we can mod the hell out of our bikes and get away with it, if we play it smart.

I lived things that used to be on no ones list to control. Now those things are either against the law, taxed, over-populated or ruined in some other way by becoming popular.

Mums the word.
 
zzoing said:
it is madness that the technology is available to make a 40 kg electric bike that can travel 100 miles in between charges at 50mph,

Sorry; if nobody else will call bullshit on that claim, I'll have to do it. That set of specs is hogwash. Put up or shut up. At best, you'd have someone the size of a jockey riding an unsafe flimsy contraption, with an aero fairing built like a Chinese lantern, to get to those performance benchmarks.

There are legal classifications for mopeds and motorcycles, including custom-built motorcycles. Use them. If what you want is special privileges, based on the fact that you want them, say so. Don't try to make an electric motorcycle into something other than a motorcycle just because it's electric.
 
Stealth gets my vote.

My ebikes are all technically illegal because they still provide electric assistance over 15mph, by a big margin in the case of a couple. They don't look illegal though, in fact they don't even really look like ebikes unless you look closely. I've found that as long as I pedal and don't behave like a hooligan in the city, no one seems to even notice the bikes are electric.

Apart from making the latest bike pretty stealthy looking, the best thing I've done is sort the gearing out so I can pedal at 25mph plus. Even if I'm not contributing much, the illusion that pedalling gives stops people even noticing that the bike is electric, even at fair speeds. After all, lycras often cruise around at 20mph plus, so it isn't at all unusual for bikes to be seen at those sort of speeds.

Moped laws vary so much across the planet that it's a pointless definition here, in my view. We had a moped law that was pretty close to the current ebike law, in that mopeds had to have pedals that could propel the bike and an engine less than 50cc. That got changed around 30 years ago, for example, my RD50 project is technically a moped, at the time it was registered the definition here was: “Moped - a motorcycle weighing less than 250kg and with a maximum design speed not greater than 30mph. If the engine is an internal combustion engine its capacity must not exceed 50cc. Propelling pedals are not required”. Now I think a moped is defined here as a motorcycle (no pedals required) than cannot exceed 30mph, with a motor/engine power not exceeding 4kW (I think). I know that in France, pretty much anyone from the age of 14 (I think) used to be able to ride a sub-50cc moped with pedals, with no registration, licence etc, although that might have changed now. I believe there are a few countries where mopeds (in the original sense of a 50cc bike with pedals) don't need registration as long as they are speed limited to around 30mph.

The EU is getting more and more wrapped around the axle of complex legislation and regulation for ebikes, but has at least, it seems, realised that speed and mass are the things that are proportional to causing injury or damage to others. It has always seemed really odd to me that ebikes have a 15mph speed restriction applied, yet if you rode along at 15mph with your average lycra brigade you'd be left miles behind. I suspect a lot of cyclists travel at more than 15mph on the flat, yet they aren't subject to regulation, so why should an ebike have to be restricted in this way?

Personally I'd like to see laws switch to focus on real risk, ignoring the type of motive force used to drive a vehicle. I have no problem with regulation being applied to heavy or fast vehicles, as it's kinetic energy that is the main risk factor. As we already accept that it's OK for a tandem bike to travel at any speed they are capable of (within speed limits), then I can't see a good reason to not allow ebikes and light motorcycles, electric or otherwise, to be free from all regulation if they fall within the same sort of total weight and speed range.
 
Miles said:
darkone040 said:
250watts is good for someone with a disability that cant pedal themselves but for an able bodied person 250watt barely makes up for the extra 15kg of motor/battery your carrying around..
:roll:

Quite. Given that the average person can maybe deliver 100 to 150 watts for a sustained period, 250 watts is probably close to double the output that most people can manage.

As for the 15kg bit, then perhaps some simply physics might help out here. The extra mass only really has an appreciable effect when climbing a hill, so let's see what sort of a hill you'd need and the sort of speed you'd need to climb it at, to use the postulated 250 W.

The power needed to move a mass up a slope, with assuming it's carried on something where the extra mass doesn't introduce additional friction, is given by:

Power (W) = Sin alpha x V x M x g, where alpha is the angle of the slope, V is the velocity (in m/S), M is the additional mass (in kg) and g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.80665 m/S²)

Let's assume that you want to power this extra mass up a hill, at a reasonably fast hill climbing speed of, say, 15mph, or about 24 km/h (about 6.67 m/S). How steep a hill would you need in order to use 250W to move this extra 15kg?

Rearranging the equation above, the slope of the hill is given by:

alpha = ASin (P / (V x M x g)) = ASin (250 / (6.67 x 15 x 9.80665)) = 14.76 deg, or a gradient of 26.3%

AFAIK, the steepest gradients found on normal roads rarely exceed 15% to 20%. I've driven the steepest road in the UK (in a 4x4), which is 1 in 3, or 33%, and there is no way you'd ever cycle up it.
 
I think a power limit as low as 250W just leads to a lot of monkey business in how motor systems are rated. It's a useful amount of power, but it's also about six times smaller than what a fit cyclist can deliver in a quick burst. I think a lot of those "250W" motors are probably pumping out bursts of power at much higher levels, too.

The typical USA limits of 750W and 20mph are much more likely to bring you to the right side of a pedal cyclist's performance envelope. The difference there is that the e-biker can usually remain there long after the pedal cyclist becomes fatigued and has to slow down.

Even if a pedal cyclist can reach 30mph in a sprint, you won't see one blasting down a populated multi-use path at such speed. But if e-bikes are openly allowed to go so fast, that's exactly what you'll see unless they are prohibited from bicycle facilities. Most e-bikers are a different breed, dare I say a bit more clueless than fast pedal cyclists, because they didn't have to work their way up to their performance level. They're basically slow pedal cyclists who don't go slow.
 
Chalo said:
I think a power limit as low as 250W just leads to a lot of monkey business in how motor systems are rated. It's a useful amount of power, but it's also about six times smaller than what a fit cyclist can deliver in a quick burst. I think a lot of those "250W" motors are probably pumping out bursts of power at much higher levels, too.

I think you have to be in the super athlete category to get close to 1500 W, even for short bursts. All of the data I've looked at suggests that the average cyclist can sustain around 100 to 150W for an hour or two and can perhaps output 300 to 400W for a short burst (aerobically). For most ordinary people (not athletes), their aerobic limit is of the order of 100 to 150W, which sets the upper bound on sustained power. The work presented by Douglas Malewicki on human power capability (which seems to have been reasonably well reviewed) shows that pedalling can produce the following sort of power output:

Human pedal power.jpg


Chalo said:
The typical USA limits of 750W and 20mph are much more likely to bring you to the right side of a pedal cyclist's performance envelope. The difference there is that the e-biker can usually remain there long after the pedal cyclist becomes fatigued and has to slow down.

Even if a pedal cyclist can reach 30mph in a sprint, you won't see one blasting down a populated multi-use path at such speed. But if e-bikes are openly allowed to go so fast, that's exactly what you'll see unless they are prohibited from bicycle facilities. Most e-bikers are a different breed, dare I say a bit more clueless than fast pedal cyclists, because they didn't have to work their way up to their performance level. They're basically slow pedal cyclists who don't go slow.

I'm not convinced that using any power limit is sensible for regulation, when the safety criterion (for third parties at least) is really kinetic energy. I believe it makes far more sense to regulate on the basis of maximum speed and mass than it does on motor power, especially as the latter is notoriously difficult to assess in the field, whereas checking the maximum speed and weight is relatively easy.
 
Chalo said:
Even if a pedal cyclist can reach 30mph in a sprint, you won't see one blasting down a populated multi-use path at such speed. But if e-bikes are openly allowed to go so fast, that's exactly what you'll see unless they are prohibited from bicycle facilities. Most e-bikers are a different breed, dare I say a bit more clueless than fast pedal cyclists, because they didn't have to work their way up to their performance level. They're basically slow pedal cyclists who don't go slow.

Actually, in Denver, CO, Colorado Springs, CO, and now Salt Lake City, UT i see a lot of pedal cyclists going 20-30mph on the bike paths. On a nonpowered bike, i would be pedaling at about 12-18mph, and those guys just whiz by like their asses are on fire.

Maybe it's different in bike friendly, dense cities where a lot of folks are riding slow upright bikes.
 
Jeremy Harris said:
Chalo said:
I think a power limit as low as 250W just leads to a lot of monkey business in how motor systems are rated. It's a useful amount of power, but it's also about six times smaller than what a fit cyclist can deliver in a quick burst. I think a lot of those "250W" motors are probably pumping out bursts of power at much higher levels, too.

I think you have to be in the super athlete category to get close to 1500 W, even for short bursts. All of the data I've looked at suggests that the average cyclist can sustain around 100 to 150W for an hour or two and can perhaps output 300 to 400W for a short burst (aerobically).

"Super athletes" have been measured at burst power of over 2500W. If your chart were scaled in seconds rather than hours (a time frame relevant to accelerating from a stop or surmounting a short ascent), you'd find momentary power to be much higher than sustained power. If you try to join a flow of traffic using only the same amount of effort you're comfortable holding steadily for an hour, you'll find it takes a very long time to come up to speed.

That's one reason motor power limits wouldn't work so well if they were closely observed (and if no pedal power were applied to augment motor power).

You're right that top speed and mass are the things that count most from a public safety standpoint. Since individuals are atomic, and they come in a huge range of sizes, I think only the bike's mass should count towards the equation, and the weight limit should be high enough that even a very large person has a shot at realizing the maximum speed for a useful distance. Texas specifies 100 lbs (with no power limit), which is enough for just about anybody to carry 20mph for a fair distance.

Chalo
 
I've popped it over 2000watts peak a few years ago when I was working on my sprint a lot. Admittedly, most cyclists are doing that, but it was extremely useful to use that power in traffic.

I agree watt limits are silly. All you need to do is put a speed limit on the bike path. Then all cyclists can use the path at a safe speed, regardless of whether they are on an ebike or a spandex roadie or casual cyclist.

Yes its that simple. A posted speed limit takes care of all your worries. Just like on streets. You don't assume a ducati is dangerous when it goes through a 20mph school zone.
 
liveforphysics said:
Do the right thing, if some poor fool feels its his duty to punish you, immediately go back to doing the right thing, and encourage others to do the right thing as well.

By "the right thing", I of course mean using the worlds lowest impact, lowest harms, lowest harm potential form of transportation that can suit your transportation needs (an ebike built to your speed/power tastes).

Amen.
 
i say rather than changing a law, simply break it..... laws are fiction, basically superstitions.......just the beliefs and opinions of some, violently forced on the others as a means of coercion and submission.......aka terrorism by definition.
As long as you do not kill, harm, endanger, or waste,with the exception of defense.......your not doing anything wrong, regardless of what "the law" says.
If some one (cops or other wise) threaten or attack you for not sharing the same fictional beliefs as them, defend yourself, just like you would with any other terrorist attack. self defense is a right, laws do NOT change rights, especially the right to self defense. no matter what inky papers some one has.
Eventually, when enough people break a law, it can no longer be violently forced on others, making it irrelevant, and its violence no longer present.... laws only apply to those who submit to them.
Laws impede progress, and encourage violence.... i woudlnt waste your time on them... we can do soo much more if we focus our time on reality, rather than beliefs and opinons.
 
There are laws that apply to motorcycles. An electric motorcycle with pedals is still a motorcycle. You can be a responsible and fair player by fulfilling the responsibilities all motorcyclists are expected to fulfill, or you can be a no-account freeloader criminal and try to pass off your illegal moto as a bicycle.
 
Technology advancements are capable of moving far quicker than our legal bureaucracy systems and culture, which DO tend to be restrictive to such advancements, and are certain to provoke a level of disagreement!

For the last century or so it's been quite simple,.... you have "bicycles", and you have "motor vehicles"!!! And motor driven "cycles" ARE a motor vehicle! But NOW we have an "electric vehicle" technology that no one can seem to agree about,.... sorta. "Hybrid" vehicles were still considered motor vehicles, and as technology advanced to pure electric vehicles they remained as class of motor vehicle unique in themselves, yet categorically the same,... in law AND culture. And that cultural part is HUGE factor, here and elsewhere. That's the part that refuses to see a bicycle as being anything more than "a bicycle"! And if it's powered, in whole or in part, by technology,... is it still "a bicycle?", or not?

Here in the states, our legal bureaucracy has already made it difficult and confusing as how one should operate a bicycle, which is further complicated by culture. Laws say we're a part of traffic, with limitations,.... culture says, your limitations preclude you from being any part of traffic! Those limitations on BOTH sides seem mostly concerned with "power" and "speed", and it seem our legal bureaucracy AND culture will poorly address this new technology of "e-bike" with those major concerns first and foremost, while somewhat ignoring more important issues, and creating far more complexity and confusion.

I personally feel that "speed and power" categories, as well as classifications of recumbents, tricycles, pedelecs, power-assisted, etc., are poor at best in addressing the important issues, that being the SAFE use of e-bikes and their variations, in public and in traffic. IMO, a "bicycle" is still generally and culturally recognized and accepted as "a vehicle that CAN be solely human powered",... that's simple enough. Any such vehicle (regardless of power or propulsion) that can merge and be maintain in traffic, must abide by safe traffic laws (and being so equipped), otherwise it must maintain laws of safe bicycle use... that's simple too. Policing is much more simplified as well, as it needs only to be concerned with the safe operation of vehicles in public and traffic.

Of course it is customary in our culture that most vehicles capable of inflicting damage with a certain liability, be insured,.... nothing to do with safe operation or use. But everything to do with MONEY! And of course folks are beginning to notice that "no new law is passed or even considered, unless it is profitable for corporations and or govt, on the pretense of being for the good of the greater public." THIS, is where the new technology of e-bikes will likely be "categorized" in any manner seen fit by corporations and govt., and may again, limit and restrict the growth of that same technology! UGH!
 
Its better to fly under the radar with your current ebike.
And in the meantime, move forward with a Pro Ebike Lobby group, rather then have dumb stupid frocking politicians set the laws based on donations from Ford and the likes.
 
"I'm not convinced that using any power limit is sensible for regulation"...

AGREE with J. Where's the move to regulate power limits on cars? In urban environments, my vote, to limit max. speed ONLY. (These daze could be done pretty simply w/existing tech like WiFi, etc.) ... AND "slower" speeds = "better" aerodynamics = less energy consumed per mile/etc. (See also further distances per charge and/or smaller Wh capacity needed "per trip".) LOTS of folks need to "fight gravity" aka "go up hills" with vehicles "weighed down with stuff".

:wink:
 
Back
Top