20mph or Bust(ed) - USA "Legal" eBike Speed

[wineboyrider]

In Oregon, USA, the limit is 1000 Watts

Here is where it gets tricky the DOT (aka the FEDS) allow a state law to be stricter than the federal law, but usually not more lenient. This is also true of wine labeling by the way...

 

[wineboyrider]

An electric scooter is also not defined in NM law. The moped definition doesn't fit as well as the segway definition, because of it's slow speed. Bottom line is we are both probably right, but an electric bicycle is a lot more useful in the city when it doesn't have turn signals and all that other crap that true 50cc or less mopeds have to have. Plus, the moped definition specifically states engine cubic centimeters so that leaves an electric "motorized" bike out.

 

[dogman dan]

You don't register mopeds at all in NM for one thing. Strictly speaking, electric bicycles simply don't exist in NM, except for the fed regulation that allows selling them. So you can buy one at walmart.

Hope it stays that way. Grey is better than a shitty black and white law. Soon as we get a law, we'll get limited to 20 mph I bet. I like having 30 mph be legal. But having a grey area in the law does make it very confusing. I'm certain sure two the cretins we elect for judge will never figure it out the same way. So if you end up in NM court, have a good lawyer the judge likes. Then your lawyer can explain the law to the judge.

You can get a DUI on a "bicycle" because it's a "vehicle". It's not a motor vehicle. In NM a "bicycle with helper engine" is a motor vehicle. It says so pretty clearly in the definitions section. This section is omitted in many on line sources of the code causing even more confusion. There is no other closer definition, the Segway law clearly states non tandem wheels. "bicycle" in the code includes trikes, again very clearly stated.

The fed law supersedes the state law if they try to enact a stricter law, governing SELLING ebikes, that calls them motor vehicles.

It has nothing to do with law for operating them on public roadways. In vehicle codes, they can still be called motor vehicles. That's why some places they are still flat out illegal on the street.

 

[wineboyrider]

The one thing you forgot to mention is that you can insure and register a moped, but don't have to in NM.

 

[wineboyrider]

It's usually not the law or the judge in NM, but the police you have to worry about!
[youtube]mqtwjOJ9FCQ[/youtube]

 

[DrkAngel]

You must be kidding!!!!

How on earth can somebody who has been on ES this long think that fed law has a thing to do with using an ebike on the public street or bike trails?

Years ago, I, upon occasion, felt it necessary to inform zealous eBike activists that H.R. 727 pertained solely to eBike manufacture.
More recently, I accidentally found [House Report 107-5] ... "the Committee on Energy and Commerce, submitted the
following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H.R. 727]"


This report seems to justify H.R. 727 as a promotion for eBike legalization and proliferation!

Most relevant highlights

"Purpose and Summary

... The bill removes low-
speed electric bicycles from the definition of ``motor
vehicle'' within the jurisdiction of the Department of
Transportation ... "

" Background and Need for Legislation

Electric bicycles are in use worldwide, with the market
rapidly evolving over the last several years. Electric bicycles
generate no pollution, are almost silent, and can greatly
increase the recreational and transportation options for
commuters.
Some electric bicycles (power-assisted) provide motorized
assistance pedaling, although they cannot be operated solely by
motor power. These bicycles, like all non-powered bicycles, are
regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).
Other electric bicycles (power-on-demand) can be operated
solely by an electric motor, but still use lightweight frames,
are used in a manner similar to non-powered bicycles. They have
maximum motorized speeds not greater than those typical of a
reasonably athletic bicyclist while biking.
Typical users of low-speed electric bicycles include
1. older and disabled riders who do not have the physical strength to
ride up hills without motorized assistance,
2. law enforcement agencies who use electric powered bicycles to increase their
patrol range, and
3. commuters who cannot afford automobile
transportation or
4. that work in traffic-congested areas.
Power-on-demand, low-speed electric bicycles are currently
regulated by the Department of Transportation by the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Section 30111 of
title 49, U.S. Code, requires the Secretary of Transportation
to prescribe motor vehicle safety standards. The term ``motor
vehicle'' is defined by section 30102(6) as ``a vehicle driven
or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use
on public streets, roads, and highways * * *.''
If NHTSA were to enforce its regulations on low-speed
electric bicycles strictly, the bikes would be required to have
a number of safety features, such as brake lights, turn
signals, automotive grade headlights, rear view mirrors, and
license plates, that are prohibitively costly, unwieldy, or
consume too much power for a low-speed electric bicycle. It is
estimated that the application of motor vehicle regulations to
power-assisted bicycles would increase the retail price of
these bicycles by at least $200-$300 and make them less
manageable and more unwieldy for consumers.
Since low-speed electric bicycles are designed not to
exceed the maximum speed of a human-powered bicycle, and they
are typically used in the same manner as human-powered
bicycles, electric bicycles shouldbe regulated in the same
manner and under the same agency (the CPSC) as human-powered bicycles.

Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments:

H.R. 727 contains an intergovernmental mandate as defined in
UMRA. The bill would expressly preempt state laws and
regulations governing low-speed electric bicycles that contain
more stringent requirements than those established by the
Consumer Product Safety Commission."

"Section 2. Motor vehicle safety standards

Section 2 clarifies that in transferring jurisdiction over
low-speed electric bicycles to the Consumer Product Safety
Commission, those bicycles will no longer be regulated as motor
vehicles subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of
Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration."

This report 1st expounds the benefits of low speed electric bicycles, explains possible impediments, then promotes the removal of these impediments.
The purpose of this law, as explained, is to legalize and keep affordable, electric bicycles.

The vein of the report is that it is intended to unhinder, then promote, the legalization and proliferation of electric bicycles upon American streets!

Remember!
This report was presented with and attached to H.R. 727.
It was "in mind" and literally "in hand" as this law was passed.

 

[grindz145]

Wow, that's really cool Drk. In strict terms of the law, I don't think it will absolve an ebike rider completely, but it was certainly the intent of this law to encourage ebike use. I'm sure you would still have a hard time fighting a citation using this law.

Anyone know any good attorneys? All of the legal council that has weighed in on this so far has basically said that it does not necessarily govern street use.

 

[DrkAngel]

Wow, that's really cool Drk. In strict terms of the law, I don't think it will absolve an ebike rider completely, but it was certainly the intent of this law to encourage ebike use. I'm sure you would still have a hard time fighting a citation using this law.

Anyone know any good attorneys? All of the legal council that has weighed in on this so far has basically said that it does not necessarily govern street use.

Civil rights violation!

Discrimination(?) against:

1. older and disabled riders who do not have the physical strength to
ride up hills without motorized assistance,
2. law enforcement agencies who use electric powered bicycles to increase their
patrol range, and
3. commuters who cannot afford automobile
transportation or
4. that work in traffic-congested areas.

 

[FeralDog]

The USA Federal definitions (laws) came from discussions about the American with Disabilities Act, and funding for Federal Transportation projects (including bike paths, bike trails, bike racks on buses, etc, etc).

I know some folks think that laws should be written just for them, but that's not how laws should work. :wink:
The Federal definitions for electric motors on bicycles were made to encompass law abiding peoples' needs from childhood to senior citizens. 20mph is an excellent motor limit for those circumstances ,because prior to that definition, the Fed fuzzy decision was that ALL motors on bicycles made them "motorized vehicles" (ie -motorized land driven conveyances)
In the USA, States and municipalities have a long histories of motor vehicle laws. The 20Mph "speed limit" was an excellent compromise to allow bicycles to be "motorized" with an electric motor WITHOUT being defined as a "motorized vehicle".

{In my State ---- electric bikes = "Electrically assisted pedal-powered bicycles and tricycles (maximum speed of 20 mph) as well as electrically powered-mobility devices for persons with disabilities"
BUT : under 50cc ICE motorized bikes get 30mph on streets BUT no rights on many bike paths and trails.}

In USA --- Your State , and local government can make laws and codes about the Rules of the Road and rules for bicycles. The Federal government has defined what a legal (electric) bicycle is. If your State and local laws conflict with Federal ,then you may have a case (example: Federal funding for transportation projects in the State may be withheld).
If you want more than 20mph be prepared to lobby and legislate. 25 mph ... 30Mph may be better? BUT the merits must be justified for all. Beware getting lumped back into a "motorized vehicle"!

{Wild hypothetical caveat---- A 7 year old child ridding a junk 30 mph electric bike into a brick wall and bursting into Lipo flames is not the vision any legislator wants to bring home at voting season. }

Gay rights, gun rights, bike rights, drunk rights --- they are all constantly argued in USA courts every day. Price we pay for the concept of freedom.....

 

[teklektik]

All of the legal council that has weighed in on this so far has basically said that it does not necessarily govern street use.

To be 100% clear: it does not - there is no gray area of 'not necessarily'.

It may be useful to note that DA lives in NY where ebikes have no legal standing for on-road use - they are illegal. He has a strong vested interest in finding some means to ride legally and is reaching to HR 727 as a solution. However, HR 727 does not apply to ebike USE and does not and cannot provide a 'default' legality for USE in the absence of State traffic statutes. Please do not believe otherwise.

CPSC administers and enforces several federal laws. These laws authorize the agency to protect the public against unreasonable risks of injuries and deaths associated with consumer products.

The 'intent' for the CPSC via HR 727 was to promote ebikes - which within its charter (note the context) it did by claiming its jurisdiction over ebikes, defining a 'product' called a 'low speed electric bicycle' as an extension of its existing 'bicycle' definition, and protecting the public from unsafe products of that type. It cannot determine how such products are used - simply that they are 'safe'. And of course, enforcement of CPSC regulations is the responsibility of the CPSC - it can't force other agencies to expend resources to enforce its regulations.

• So - within the context of its charter, the CPSC has fulfilled the 'intent' of HR 727 by making it possible to BUY an ebike without concern for 'safety'.

Unfortunately, the NY State Legislature will not allow the product to be USED on public ways. This is an entirely different matter that is out of the purview of the CPSC and no amount of twisting of the law will transform the identifying criteria of a product type into a body of traffic statutes regulating USE that must be enforced by the separate governing body of a State.

As for the rest of the States, many use language from federal regulations in their statutes, but any ebike or moped definitions found in those statutes serve a different purpose than the CPSC definition - they are to classify vehicles so the relevance of (other) state statutes relating to USE is unambiguous (e.g. 'mopeds' can do this, 'motor vehicles' can do that - referenced by the defined vehicle classification). The state definitions and CPSC definition serve different purposes and can happily co-exist since the context and applicability are entirely different. One defines a product so it can be 'safe', the other classifies a vehicle to determine the traffic laws that will apply. It would be good if the definitions were uniform, but they're not and arguing that 'they should be' does not allow (unrelated) safety definitions to be applied instead as a USE classification.

Moreover, in the absence of referencing State USE statutes, simply defining a 'low speed electric bicycle' (as per the CPSC or otherwise) is meaningless if there are no associated state laws granting road use to the defined vehicle type. That is, unless there is a statute that specifically says that a 'low speed electric bicycle' (and the terminology of the definition must be precise) can be operated on the street, then the simple definition itself does not allow or disallow anything - it simply provides terminology to refer to a vehicle class with certain characteristics (e.g. 750W). The entire premise of CPSC applicability to state law makes no sense.

Dogman's summary of HR 727 is accurate, and anyone not 100% certain of this should look to the many other sources for clarification - not this thread.

Anyone know any good attorneys?

This excellent article by a product safety attorney has been available since mid-summer and turns up prominently on a quick Google:
Legal analysis: Confusion over electric bike regulations.

 

[DrkAngel]

It may be useful to note that DA lives in NY where ebikes have no legal standing for on-road use - they are illegal. He has a strong vested interest in finding some means to ride legally and is reaching to HR 727 as a solution. However, HR 727 does not apply to ebike USE and does not and cannot provide a 'default' legality for USE in the absence of State traffic statutes. Please do not believe otherwise.

Fortunately NYS does not enforce against the Federally "bicycle" defined eBikes.
NYC is especially flush with eBike traffic.

Of course there are many eBikers prosecuted, but ... they are prosecuted for traffic infractions, wrong way on one way street, speeding, reckless endangerment etc, not for operating a motor vehicle!

The NYS Assembly has passed a Bill legalizing eBikes, every year for the past 10years+, usually unanimously!
If you know anything about politics, I understand your disbelief.
More believable ... is that the same Bill is killed in the Senate every year.

See - New York State eBike Bill

 

[dogman dan]

Mr Hansen's article has a lot of truth in it. But it's slanted more towards the product liability question since that is what kind of lawyer he is.

Nevertheless, It's quite clear to me that the fed law does not allow you to ride an ebike anywhere. It just regulates selling them, and where the buck stops when one breaks and hurts somebody riding it. It doesn't help that along with the usual lies about range, the average retailer selling to the USA also quotes the fed law to the customers.

NM law on mopeds is terribly confusing. I hope it doesn't get clarified soon, since I like having 30 mph legal for the shorter trips. Soon as they make a new law, you can bet your balls they will reduce the speed allowed.

But if I ever lose my drivers license, you can just bet that I'll be all going. "but officer, it does 20 mph max, it's a bicycle not a moped." And in fact, I do that now if I ride the bike paths.

What I do, is ride it like a moped on the street. But If I set wheels on a bike path, I plug in my speed limit jumper, and ride less than 20 mph. Under the current muddle of NM law, I see it defined by whether or not I have the 30 mph enabled at the moment.

So you see, despite all my spew, I too want to have my cake and eat it too. A few of the trails are now posted no motorized vehicles. That use of the term motorized vehicle does include sub 20 mph ebikes. Other trails are posted no motor vehicles. On the trails, I figure the key thing is to ride so you don't piss people off. After all, in NM, you don't need the cops looking for you , EH? Certainly not the State Chota's anyway.

 

[DrkAngel]

It is important to remember that:

Even if eBikes are legal, that does not absolve the cyclist of liability for any damages or injuries!

An eBike modified beyond "legal" might invoke "criminal liability"!

These are among the reasons that I typically limit my eBikes to 20mph.
I do keep my brakes and reflexes well tuned and have avoided injuring anyone, besides myself, during the last ~20,000 eBikin' miles.


Of course I do still plan on building an eMotorcycle, with legal title, registration and insurance.
1st build designed for just running around town. Probably geared for a max 40mph, allowing perky acceleration to the legal 30mph. Trying to find a 125cc Enduro with bad motor, or similar.

 

[100volts+]

Since low-speed electric bicycles are designed not to
exceed the maximum speed of a human-powered bicycle, and they
are typically used in the same manner as human-powered
bicycles, electric bicycles shouldbe regulated in the same
manner and under the same agency (the CPSC) as human-powered bicycles.

"maximum speed of a human-powered bicycle"
Maximum speed of a human powered bike down a straight, 2 mile 45 degree hill has got to be faster than 50 so my 28s cromotor bike is legal in NM. Yeah baby.

EDIT: Okay a 45 degree hill would turn a bike from human powered to gravity powered. My mistake.

 

[FeralDog]

Once upon a time I was part of a "group" that worked on writing the laws (legislative).
On Federal Laws --- and the States & local entities obeying , enforcing , or downright ignoring them ... well it's always been a grey area :? .

In general , Article One, Section 8 of the Federal Constitution gives the Fed the power and province http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlevi --- BUT case law {example: Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, 544 U. S. 431, 449 (2005)} leans towards the court mechanism that IF there are possibly conflicting federal and state laws on the subject, the federal courts are required to, if at all possible, not trump state law.
Confused yet?
Then there is the "test" of the law that leans heavily on the Congressional laws "intent and purpose" AND the question of weather the actual Fed Law was deliberately done to supersede a State or local law.
Weeeeeeeeeeeeewwwww!

So, on the subject of (electric) bicycle laws and that 20mph "limit" and "definition" . What our group did was this.
Our group was founded by two US military veterans who were disabled in service to their (our) country. These guys rode bicycles as therapy for their massive injuries. We worked with many Federal agencies and quite a few Fed & State Senators and Congressmen. Our goal was legal "access" to roads and trails for everybody (within reason). The 20mph Federal (limit) DEFINITION on electric bicycles was a blessing that got the "foot in the door" to allow us to argue what a bicycle was Federally defined as , and where it could be used because many State roads and many trails, are partially funded with Federal monies.

In our interest, the 20mph "limit" for a pedal bicycles with an electric "assist" was a good thing for the disabled, and those folks getting older in age (et al). BUT exceeding 20mph was not that reasonably safe to allow some asshat wanting to selfishly (and unsafely) zoom 50mph closely passed a grandmother walking a baby stroller on a bike/pedestrian trail.
Yes, there are compromises in lawmaking ... hopefully predicated on "justice for all".

Our efforts paid off, but we had a primary concentrations in Colorado, Illinois, and Missouri States.

So, in conclusion: we found that presenting a reasoned , progressive, and consistent argument from the podium behind several purple hearts (and silver stars) worked quite well to help our lawmakers understand the light of our intent.

Now: hypothetically, can a local small town pass law that makes it illegal to ride a red bicycle and then ass probe the rider in search of an alien transmitting device? Answer: Yes.
Then: Can that law be held valid in a Federal court ....probably not----but we are always in an amorphous grey area where US laws are concerned. Therefore, the testing upwards in the courts.

Just my pro bono, top-of-the-head opinions. Other will surely disagree , and that leads to a good ole' fashioned weasel fight we Americans hold so dearly .

 

[dogman dan]

In a perfect world, an asswipe passing the granny at 50 mph on the bike trail would be liable to police action regardless of the legality of illegality of his particular machine. Lately in this state, and anal probe is starting to look like the cops let you off easy. They are not screwing around in the last month, since the guy with cop killer tattooed on his knuckles went out cop hunting last month instead of going for a deer. Mom and the kids, out come the guns and start shooting.

Back on topic more, Obviously you are liable for what you do. As always, in the USA where never leaving the house can result in somebody suing you.

Every time the subject of riding on multi use trails in cities comes up, I say speed limits should be set that reflect the particular nature of the trail. Not a one size fits all, yes or no to motorized conveyances.

Rather than get into the argument whether a 150 pound looks like a gas 150cc scooter ebike is a bike or not a bike, vs a 100w stand up scooter, vs motorized skateboard, vs kit bolted to regular bike, vs Segway....... What should be done by the municipality is to simply enact and more or less enforce a sensible speed limit. For example, on the trails that surround Mission Bay San Deigo. The very popular and crowded trails at Pacific Beach should be about 5 mph. But over on the bay side, 20 mph might be quite reasonable. No way is above 20 mph reasonable for a trail shared by walkers. Part of the solution to the problem is convincing joggers and walkers that right up the middle blocking all passing traffic is not allowed. You can see this work quite well in Albuquerque, where the walkers on the river trail have been trained to walk to the right by signs posted warning them that faster bikes use the trail too.

Simply amazing to see it work so well in burque when the trail is quite crowded. Yet here in Las Cruces the bikes shun the trails because they are plagued by incourteous walkers that cannot fathom sharing the trail.

Then on the streets, mingling with cars, It beats me why 20 mph should be the limit when fit cyclists can pedal 30 mph for hours on end. I do get it that 40mph might be too fast for many cheaper bikes brakes or tires or whatever. But 25 or 30mph on the street should be allowed. If 25 is the limit for a moving truck in the neighborhood with the kids playing ball in the street, why is an ebike limited to 20? Makes no sense to me for street.

 

[gogo]

The 20 MPH provision was left out of a proposed revision to the Des Moines, Iowa city code:
https://www.dmgov.org/Government/CityCouncil/WorkshopDocuments/022811MACModelBicycleOrdinance.pdf
The state law already allows the 750W to be applied at speeds over 20 MPH when assisted by human power, but this revision would do away with the silly 'faux pedaling' requirement (which effectively imposes a condition that can cause unsafe dynamics created by pedaling). It just seems impractical for purposes of enforcement to stipulate a 20 MPH limit, which an unassisted bicyclist can regularly exceed.

In other research I found out bicycles aren't prohibited from the interstates in Iowa if they can attain and maintain 40 MPH:
Iowa Statue 321.285

e.  Any kind of vehicle, implement, or conveyance incapable of
      attaining and maintaining a speed of forty miles per hour shall be
      prohibited from using the interstate road system.

I'm not sure what the typical grades are for the interstates here, but if you had a stretch that was downhill with a tailwind while you were in a streamliner…

 

[FeralDog]

@dogman --- With all due respect, I think you would be an excellent voice in your State or local government's efforts to legislate these "bicycle laws".
Are you involved?

I will tell all from experience , without a knowledgeable person to speak about these issues, then the "bicycle laws" will reflect an ad hoc committee of special interest {i.e. -people interested in writing a law that will ONLY benefit themselves. Yes there is always money $$$ involved).

Caveat: the law making process is a bit of a Santa Claus Syndrome. Everybody wants exactly what "they" want and they love you until they get the final "present". Then they can/will bitch and moan that its not perfect , and then blame you for all your hard work and efforts.
C'est la vie !

On liability, well the government has the deepest pockets. Sadly it is not "obviously you are liable for what you do". NOPE: mostly "it's not my fault ,blame somebody else" in todays' USA.
Ramming an e-bike into a grandma and a baby at 30mph will surely result in a lawsuit of multiple entities "being sued". Oft the perpetrator of such hypothetical recklessness is the White-Trash Floyd type who lost his drivers license's (multiple times) and was speeding home (meth induced) from the tavern after getting his daily buzz on. Or maybe it's a newbie e-bike owner thrilled at the taste for speed, but has virtually no skill at that velocity. The personal injury lawyers will target the deepest pockets and then paint pictures of their clients "childhood cuteness", and our societies "victimization" of the perp.

The laws and codes MUST encompass everybody. Not just a special group that wants to go faster, or slower. That's where Part 1 comes into play. The engineering "design" of the street or path/trail. Good designs work better than "signs-signs-everywhere-the-signs". Yes, there are structures and safety methods used in multi-use trails just to try and slow people down before they hurt themselves.

Part 2 is fair and reasoned enforcement (which is practically just wishful thinking). Having police pull over an 11 year old e-biker and demanding ID, then citing "probable cause" as them hiding in the trail bushes with a radar gun ... is a nightmare scenario. 20mph max. was not just the initial definition, but hopefully the speed that would not trigger the predatory response trigger of the local over-zealous Barney Fife (wishful thinking?).

SO----- now there is a new trend of hope that may lead us into the future?
The Complete Streets design and legislations ----> http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/complete-streets/federal-policy/on-the-hill. And our local efforts ----> http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_421b1838-7f5e-5354-af1d-0bcd08b7cc4e.html

IMHO.... the last thing an e-bicycle rider should want to happen is to get totally lumped into the motor vehicle class of laws. Then, for most practical purposes, they don't remain a "bicycle" anymore. On top legal speeds ----be careful what you wish for .....

 

[dogman dan]

I see your point of view about influencing the legislation. I would get involved if I lived in Colorado, where there is a perceived ebike "problem", and groups like horse owners have an anti all bikes agenda. But as long as NM remains completely ignorant that ebikes exist at all, I will enjoy it while it lasts.

We really are still that small numbers here, nobody gives a shit, and it will be nice for that to last awhile. Nobody is lobbying for anything in Santa Fe yet, and for now remaining completely under the radar is best for this state. We have a long history and tradition here of letting people be weird as they want if they are sober, and lots of space around to be weird in. So there has not been a problem developing here at all so far. Nobody is going to spend their money lobbying for their share of 1% of the market here.

No hordes of DUI types riding scooter looking ebikes like hooligans yet. If we do get that, they can arrest them for riding a bicycle with a helper motor with no license as it stands now. Even if judges let them off anyway, it will help deter that kind guy from hooligan riding. If he rides nice, I don't care if he rides without the license, and likely the cops and judges won't either.

When the law does change here, I seriously doubt I will get what I would like to see, speed limits but generous power limits. We have big steep hills here, so allowing only 20 mph won't be such a burden, but limiting power will. 25mph 2000w would be nice, but it's too unlike the other states to have a chance of happening.

 

[FeralDog]

..... But as long as NM remains completely ignorant that ebikes exist at all, I will enjoy it while it lasts. ...

@dogman- I see your point, and your wisdom! Best to "let a sleeping dog lay" :lol:

Our State was sleepy & boring on any bicycle laws. The two military vets I previously mentioned were ditty-bopping along on their bicycles one day and were confronted by the local Barney cop attempting to enforce the wishes of a Mr. Burns type "politically connected" landowner. The resulting fight got immense in proportion because those disabled vets would not back down, they fought. Then the issues, years later, evolved from that into laws for 49cc ICE and 20mph electric bicycles & legal uses. It was a wild and interesting ride! What a long strange trip it had been.

I remember one weird meeting in Colorado when a gaggle of Lance-Wanna-Be's in Spandex (dressed similar to Italian clowns with NASACAR advertising) got to shouting that electric bicycle's were "CHEATERS".
Yes, the irony of that came about a few years later in the Lanceroid scandals.

Illinois meetings were curious in that most attendees on the "bicycle" subject were government employees sent there to get some free Federal money, and of course chow-down on free donuts and coffee while avoiding any real work.

The "issue" of legal speeds on an e-bike may pop-up in any State in the weirdest way.
Say, one night you are cruising along on your e-bike ... and out of nowhere an "illegal colonist" pops out of the darkness and you accidently slam into him. Then the next day , the bubble-headed-bleach-blonde on Faux News shows the story depicting you as a wild-eyed backwoodsy speeding racist attacker with dangerous explosive lipo batteries ready to cause havoc upon ..... well you get the picture. My point is , that the "laws" get used in weird ways , especially when they are fuzzy, and the media wants to sell ratings to a demographic group :wink: .
"Man bites dog" sells advertising slots.

My unsolicited suggestion for any would be e-activist is to prepare for battle as a non-profit, or not-for profit group first. If you win your desires on e-bike speeds you may get lots of $$$$ in grants and consulting fees. If you loose , you wind up in jail anyways ... with a bunch of hard core criminals asking you "what you in fer' "?
Answer--- " I was doin' 30mph on an e-bike ... and I don't wanna' be your wife! "

 

[DrkAngel]

I remember one weird meeting in Colorado when a gaggle of Lance-Wanna-Be's in Spandex (dressed similar to Italian clowns with NASACAR advertising) got to shouting that electric bicycle's were "CHEATERS".

I use the term Spandexters.
Tho not necessarily in a derogatory vein ...

I love the show Dexter!
Something of a ... purist, in his profession.

As with all sub-species of cyclists, the group should not be held responsible for the actions or attitudes of some individuals.

And yes ... upon the occasion of dedicated cycling days I have squeezed my sagging butt & junk into abrasion free cycling wear.

 

[DrkAngel]

In the works is a freewheel crank mid-drive.
Tough to figure and still maintain 20mph "legality".
Till I graphed the stats.



Graph is for a MY1018z or XYD-16 gear reduction motors @ 24V with the oem 9T sprocket.

Swapping from the 34-11T 7 speed to a 34-13T should give a mountain bike precisely 20mph!

 

[John in CR]

DrkAngel,

Unless you already have a negative history with local law enforcement, why not approach the issue from the other end of the spectrum? Laws are often meaningful only to the extent they are enforced. This varies not only by department and jurisdiction, but all the way down to the individual level on both sides. If yours is a fairly small town area, then it should be a simple matter to obtain a stay out of trouble card that allows your ebike to fudge well beyond written laws. Operating an ebike in that framework is so much more pleasant and convenient for you, and more importantly in talking with the guy high enough to hand you that stay-out-of-trouble card, higher ebike speeds within posted speed limits means greater safety and convenience to motorists and others.

20mph isn't even a good enough breeze for me to stay cool on a sunny day, so I wouldn't even bother with an ebike with a hard limit there.

 

[DrkAngel]

Yeah ... might just go 48V and keep it in 1st gear ...
except for ... special occasions?



Sadly, unless a jackshaft or gigantic motor chainring, pedal assist is very limited.
But at 48V it is effectively an electric mototcycle ...
The eZip motors (MY1018z & XYD-16) do not survive well at 48V and often shear the key of the motor sprocket.

My projected highest voltage use will be 44.4V with a reduced amperage controller.
44.4V is convenient for my builds and works nicely with 48V controllers.
A limited Amp controller reduces damaging waste and heat at lower, high torque, rpms, while allowing full power at higher, more efficient speeds.

 

[DrkAngel]

Tried my new Lipo cell 25.9V 25.92Ah ...
On a 2013 Trailz LS w/13T mod ... too fast!
Can't restrain myself.
Using too much power and exceeding "legal".
So, built a 22.2V 30.24Ah.
Runs perfect ... just under 20mph.