Registering high powered ebike as moped.

Alan B said:
case law is generally required to sort the legal details out.

Yep, and I expect it will be some time before a case works its way to the California Supreme Court, if ever. It would also require the backing of some kind of consumer organization or industry group, as the average person who may get a ticket and/or their bike confiscated, is not going to have the experience to litigate it in pro per (self-represented), nor the resources to pay a law firm to take it any further than traffic court.
 
Maybe this is a deflection, but I was under the impression that CA AB 1086 (approved by legislature and signed by the Governor):
1) Limited electric bikes to 750w
2) Provided three classes: basically - Class 1, 20 mph PAS only; Class 2, 20 mph throttle; Class 3, 28 mph PAS only. Class 1 & 2 were allowed on bike trails and lanes, Class 3 were allowed on bike lanes contiguous with a roadway.
3) OEM bikes sold after January 2017 needed to have the Class designation indicated on the bike.
4) No guidelines yet for DIY AFAICT.
I have friends who are waiting to be cited and have the resources to litigate.
 
Yes, that's my reading as well except for item 4. The new regulations would have to apply to DIY bikes as well though, don't you think? What the new rules do is define what kind of electric bicycle is not subject to license and registration requirements. Therefore, if it's outside of that definition it appears it's required to be registered. So, the DIY builder who does not want to register as a moped would have to demonstrate that they only had a "750w motor" and that hasn't been properly defined.

As Alan B wrote, even a "legal" OEM bike would most likely exceed 750w.
 
AFAICT, most of the big OEM's (Specialized, Trek, Haibike) specify 250w or 350w for their systems allowing for a "factor of two" and still be safe for 750w. The Chinese manufacturers will put whatever sticker is necessary for their DIY kits, but as has been offered, doesn't mean much. It might take a long time to resolve this quandary. OTOH, ebikes don't seem to be getting a lot of traction in socal (with the exception of Pedego, which is a different market) IMO.
 
This was all discussed before, as I recall the consensus was the system integrator of a DIY setup would need to label a new setup. If your setup predates the rule change it might not be required, but labeling could be applied, or it might be necessary. The easiest thing would be to label the ebike, has anyone done this? There were some basic specs for the label.

Unless they specifically say there's a retroactive application to products made before the date of the bill's activation, it might be considered unreasonable for it to affect all the products already in existence.

The label is easy for an officer to check for, while dyno'ing the motor for output power is not easy. This will likely result in a label check and no further inspection unless something really egregious happens, then they will impound and do whatever testing they wish.

Remember that the 250W systems are made primarily for other worldwide markets, and those markets often have 250W limits, so there is no factor of two in their margins (and it is common for 250W systems to exceed this by a factor of two or more during some conditions). I suspect they can be dialed to 350W in software, but beyond that they are running out of something like heat dissipation or battery maximum current so they can't get to 750W. Their torque control algorithms may also be jerky and uncomfortable or even unsafe at the 750W continuous level. At some power level a throttle is a better control input than the jerky AC input from a pedal torque sensor.

Perhaps the largest flaw in this new regulation is the Class III (28 mph) requirement to be pedal controlled, some interpret that to mean there cannot be a throttle while others interpret that to mean the throttle can only go to 20, or that the throttle only works when you are pedaling. Some of these "pedelec" bikes have a pushbutton that acts as a throttle for low speeds for walking assist or for getting going such as is convenient on a recumbent.

It is very common for an ebike to have both pedal sensors and a throttle.

This bill was driven by manufacturers wanting to sell ebikes and wanting them to have access to the bike lanes and trails so they can advertise that and sell more bikes. It was also a "legalization" of the many 28 mph ebikes they were already selling, which they generally put "for offroad use only" stickers on to keep them "legal". It is profit motivated.

Much of the propaganda that is put out about these new rules doesn't match the text of the rules, as I recall, so one really has to go to the real rules to review what is there, and they are not all that easy to interpret as DMV definitions of words are often a bit different than you expect. I should probably go back and reread them, but in fact they have had little impact except to sell more expensive high end ebikes.

Here's the text of the new bill amending the Vehicle Code: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1096

Here is the text from the above link relating to the class definitions:

312.5. (a) An “electric bicycle” is a bicycle equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts.
(1) A “class 1 electric bicycle,” or “low-speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour.
(2) A “class 2 electric bicycle,” or “low-speed throttle-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle, and that is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour.
(3) A “class 3 electric bicycle,” or “speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 28 miles per hour, and equipped with a speedometer.
(b) A person riding an electric bicycle, as defined in this section, is subject to Article 4 (commencing with Section 21200) of Chapter 1 of Division 11.
(c) On and after January 1, 2017, manufacturers and distributors of electric bicycles shall apply a label that is permanently affixed, in a prominent location, to each electric bicycle. The label shall contain the classification number, top assisted speed, and motor wattage of the electric bicycle, and shall be printed in Arial font in at least 9-point type.


Note that it does NOT say that a class 1 or 3 ebike cannot have a throttle. It only requires pedaling for assist. So a "test for pedaling" combined with a "throttle" would apparently be legal for classes 1 and 3.

It also says After 1 Jan 2017 manufacturers and distributors of ebikes must apply a label. It says nothing about kit manufacturers or DIY builders, though it is possible and even likely that a DIY builder could be considered a manufacturer. They also specify Arial font minimum 9 point.
 
The only 2017 bike that I've seen so far, a Raleigh, had the Class 1 label under clear coat AIR. At Interbike, People for Bikes, an industry trade group, seemed to be representing the manufacturers (and it wouldn't surprise me if they were all OEM) in creating the legislation; their representatives intimated they were responsible for the successes in CA, UT & NC, but failed in SC & NY. they were going to work on those two states (maybe others too) in 2017. Lots of luck in NY.
 
Specialized states 530w on their site. Neither Trek nor Haibike have power ratings on their site, that I could find, but they use Bosch Performance CX motors which are rated at 500w. However, Bosch boasts of 75nm of torque ("The motor delivers a constant maximum torque of up to 75 Nm up even to a high speed range.") It has been a long time since I had to do that kind of math but I found a calculator online and it seems 75nm would be 785w at just 100rpm.

I can't imagine a homemade label would be acceptable. It would be like distilling moonshine and sticking a label on it that said "beer" :D

I would expect the interpretation to be that the manufacturer of the kit should provide the label - it would then be their responsibility, not the unsuspecting consumer. I'm sure there are examples of this kind of thing in other more mature industries (e.g. manufacturers of RC radio equipment are responsible for meeting FCC requirements - it's NOT buyer-beware when you purchase a receiver and radio for your RC plane kit, similarly, high power hobby rocket motor manufacturers and vendors have to meet strict requirements).
 
A label could come with a complete kit. But for partial kits or components that doesn't work.

Ebike components can be ordered from multiple places. The rating depends on motor, controller, gearing, wheel size, controller, battery, PAS sensors, speed sensor, and controller and display programming. Perhaps the controller should include a set of all three labels, it is up to the person integrating (and adjusting the system) to choose which is appropriate.


Kits often don't include the battery, changing the voltage changes everything.



A vendor could make the 3 labels and sell them separately, as professional as you like.



These rules were not designed for the DIY market.


AstroKat said:
Specialized states 530w on their site. Neither Trek nor Haibike have power ratings on their site, that I could find, but they use Bosch Performance CX motors which are rated at 500w. However, Bosch boasts of 75nm of torque ("The motor delivers a constant maximum torque of up to 75 Nm up even to a high speed range.") It has been a long time since I had to do that kind of math but I found a calculator online and it seems 75nm would be 785w at just 100rpm.

...

Excellent info on the motors.
 
Alan B said:
A label could come with a complete kit. But for partial kits or components that doesn't work.

I agree with your earlier post, that this law has much more to do with helping the manufacturers and their vendors, than consumers. BPSA is taking credit for the new law and their tag line is: "protecting your interests - growing your business"

I'm not sure if my examples were any good and, in the meantime, I've thought of some others. On the opposite end of the spectrum, what if Amazon were to offer a meth lab starter kit? I assume none of the individual components would be illegal. It could come with a disclaimer that assembling it and using it to make drugs would be illegal.

Not sure that would fly...
 
There are lots of things that you can buy that are not legal to use except under specific circumstances.

I'm not sure what point you are really trying to make. The DMV rules don't affect what you can buy or build, only what can be operated on public roads and trails. They don't say you can't make your own sticker. At the end of the day you are the manufacturer of a DIY setup. You are responsible for any mods to a factory setup as well.
 
One difference is that the laws in Europe and elsewhere specify "maximum continuous rated power of 0.25 kW", while the ones here on unspecific. Is 750w peak or like the EU?
 
The California DMV rules, shown above, don't specify clearly. The previous version of the code called for 1000W output power, as I recall.

Elsewhere in the DMV rules they refer to average output power (eg drawbar horsepower), so I take it as 750W max continuous output power here as well.

People have measured that EU approved motors put out a lot more than 250W during acceleration, but that's okay since the ratings are for maximum continuous power.

So far as I've heard the real interest in the labels is only for trail use, where type I and type II are considered to be equal to pedal bicycles, and should have access to the same trails as a pedal bike. The rangers looking for throttles are not following the new rules as they would be excluding the type II incorrectly, and they would be allowing the type III which is not allowed on trails.

Here's another quotation from the bill:

The bill would require a person riding an electric bicycle to comply with the above-described requirements relating to the operation of bicycles. The bill would prohibit persons under 16 years of age from operating a class 3 electric bicycle. The bill would also require persons operating, or riding upon, a class 3 electric bicycle to wear a helmet, as specified. The bill would prohibit the operation of a class 3 electric bicycle on specified paths, lanes, or trails, unless that operation is authorized by a local ordinance. The bill would also authorize a local authority or governing body to prohibit, by ordinance, the operation of class 1 or class 2 electric bicycles on specified paths or trails. The bill would prohibit a person from tampering with or modifying an electric bicycle to change its speed capability, unless he or she appropriately replaces the classification label. The bill would specify that a person operating an electric bicycle is not subject to financial responsibility, driver’s license, registration, or license plate requirements. The bill would also make conforming changes.

This clearly states that the end user must relabel the bike if they tamper with it. Thus clearly the end user is responsible for the correct labelling.

This also clearly states that class III ebikes are not allowed on paths and trails unless local rules specifically allow it.
 
Since the bill authorizes local authorities and governing bodies to prohibit class 1&2s from trails, does this mean that unless they are specifically banned they are permitted by default?
 
What a bill asks for, and what gets codified into law, are not necessarily the same thing...

I think [I hope] that we all agree that this law was not written very well. Perhaps it panders to manufacturers and vendors, and their own interests.

Requiring a consumer to make a label, to determine if they are complying with the law, is bizarre!
 
WoodlandHills said:
Since the bill authorizes local authorities and governing bodies to prohibit class 1&2s from trails, does this mean that unless they are specifically banned they are permitted by default?

That's my understanding, that ebikes are permitted, if they meet the requirements of a motor under 750w and a max speed of 20mph, none of which have been properly defined...

Should I start a new thread on this...?
 
The Santa Monica Mountains Conservency who police the local Mtns I ride have permitted Class 1, but have banned Class2 for over a year now. The signs at park entrances still have the blanket "no motor vehicle" language, but if you ignore them and meet a Ranger, he'll invariable ask if you have a throttle. He won't actually look and usually it's just rolling the window down and asking "Class 2 ?". Depending upon tires and tire pressure my top speed under motor is 19/21 mph and my motor is stamped 750w so I am in compliance with Class 1, but it would be safer to ride with a throttle (Class 2) when re-starting on a hill after yielding to horses or hikers.
 
We saw Hidden Figures last night. It wasn't planned but we'd heard it was an excellent movie. We realized, as we left the movie theater, that it was especially relevant on Martin Luther King day...

It doesn't surprise me that the signs haven't been replaced on all of the trails. Signs, however official they appear, don't always reflect the current laws, and they may be fake. Google: beach access in Malibu

Is it legal to ban Class 2? Not according to the law...
 
This text is from the bill that was signed, some of it is the actual text that goes into the regulations, plus more explanations. I would expect the courts to refer to this when they need refined clarity as to the intended meaning of the new rules.

The local municipality can ban a class if they choose to, and unfortunately some folks think that throttles are bad. They are generally not those who are familiar with the safety advantages of a good throttle, and they think that if you are not pedaling then you are cheating. So in a sense it is a perpetuation of the pedal biker "must pedal" myth, and those are the primary customers they market to. Remember these are the folks that wrote the new rules.

But a major driver is really profit. The companies who charge the highest ebike prices are using non-throttle type pedal sensing systems and they want to keep their market and keep throttles out, since the throttle based systems are much lower in cost and easier to retrofit while they want to force buyers into buying a new bike instead of adding a simple low cost kit to an existing one.

There are low cost pedelec systems like the BBS02, but their pedal sensing is not as refined and often is unsafe on a trail. The very expensive Bosch type systems have more sophisticated and costly torque sensors that are better but still not as precise and responsive as a quality torque based throttle setup. Even the BBS02 is fairly expensive compared to a hubmotor or Cyclone mid drive, and the pedal sensors for those are also generally low quality and subject to jerky control at higher power levels.


WoodlandHills said:
The Santa Monica Mountains Conservency who police the local Mtns I ride have permitted Class 1, but have banned Class2 for over a year now. The signs at park entrances still have the blanket "no motor vehicle" language, but if you ignore them and meet a Ranger, he'll invariable ask if you have a throttle. He won't actually look and usually it's just rolling the window down and asking "Class 2 ?". Depending upon tires and tire pressure my top speed under motor is 19/21 mph and my motor is stamped 750w so I am in compliance with Class 1, but it would be safer to ride with a throttle (Class 2) when re-starting on a hill after yielding to horses or hikers.

It seems odd they banned Class 2 over a year ago when it only went into effect recently. Unusually prompt for regulations.

Also, Class I doesn't disallow a throttle. It clearly states that pedaling is required, which in no way disallows a throttle, it just requires a pedaling sensor to enable the throttle to work. At least that's all I found thus far in the text. Show us the DMV regulation that says Class I cannot have a throttle.

So if the rangers are asking about a throttle rather than a Class then they're not exactly enforcing a class. Perhaps their rule is about throttles rather than classes. It would be good to dig up the rule they are actually enforcing to see if they are following their own rules.
 
Alan B said:
I would expect the courts to refer to this when they need refined clarity as to the intended meaning of the new rules.

I'll be sure to cite that if I get pulled over...
 
I asked the Ranger what the policy was back in early Jan of 2016 when the law had just taken effect. I had been riding the park and having the throttle conversation occasionally with the Rangers for several months prior, but had not really known where I stood so I hadn't asked further at the time. Apparently they had decided to put their "no throttle" policy into effect in advance of the new law, just how far in advance I don't know. Other ebikers have told me they have ridden there at least another year earlier with the same query from the Rangers.

You are correct in surmising that it all goes back to the "you need to earn it" attitude that many p-bikers have towards ebikes. Funny how nobody gets a chip on their shoulder about folks riding on a big ole horsey, but ride an electric bicycle on a trail and the sky is falling. Remove the illusion of pedaling and their heads will explode....... :wink:
 
I just came upon this thread and coincidentally, I'm running into the same issue, the difference being I'm in Canada and I haven't actually bought the bike yet. I currently have a conversion (actually my second build). It's a Norco Pinnacle with a 52 V pack and a Nine Continent rear hub. I've been shopping around for either a Stealth bomber style bike or many one of those sport motorcycle ebike imitations which I would upgrade to more power and speed ( I'm kind of interested in the EMMO Zone), but would try to licence and register it as a "low speed motorcycle", according to the legal definition here in the province of New Brunswick where I'm currently located. According to the NB Motor Vehicle Act, in order to be able to licence and register a bike as a low speed motorcycle the vehicle must have a VIN and a CMVSS (Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) compliance sticker. If there is no Vin and no CMVSS sticker, you need to have the vehicle certified by an engineer.problem is, where do I find an engineer who can do the inpection (which I assume wouldn't be cheap!)?? I'm wondering if any of my fellow Canucks on the forums have had any experience with this and how did they go about it. If I could hear from anyone in NB, that would be a plus!! :D
 
Alan B said:
A label could come with a complete kit. But for partial kits or components that doesn't work.

Ebike components can be ordered from multiple places. The rating depends on motor, controller, gearing, wheel size, controller, battery, PAS sensors, speed sensor, and controller and display programming. Perhaps the controller should include a set of all three labels, it is up to the person integrating (and adjusting the system) to choose which is appropriate.


Kits often don't include the battery, changing the voltage changes everything.


A vendor could make the 3 labels and sell them separately, as professional as you like.


These rules were not designed for the DIY market.

...

Excellent info on the motors.
[/quote]

I had the same issues with my mid-drive kit, paranoid about being ticketed even though it’s legal. I was able to find some class decals to help explain if I ever get stopped. But generally riding with others and not flaunting is my best defense.

...looks like they still have class 2 & 3 decals- https://www.ebay.com/itm/164376333987

Keep the pixies flowing!
 
Back
Top