How would you write ideal ebike regulations

[Grey beard]

I'm an old hotrodder, that still enjoys going fast, although many things I've done I won't be doing again in all probability. I've probably paid enough in fines and increased cost of insurance to buy a Tesla, as I got my first ticket 56 years ago.
I believe that any regulation should be free of any technical requirements as to power. What I foresee as a result of getting stopped by LE personnel is they aren't equipped to ascertain what power you have, or might have. That would require a lab setting, probably run by the state,(they would be State laws) and the confiscation of the bike or a summons to bring your bike to the lab, and possible permanent loss if it didn't meet the law. We sure as heII don't want that. Any LEO that got up on the wrong side of the bed might have your bike confiscated just because he could. Leave weight out for the same reason.
That leaves speed limits. Here in the States, as well as the EU, 20mph or 30 kph seem to satisfy the safety nazis and there is good reasoning behind it. Kinetic energy. We can sprint about 15mph on foot. Imagine running face first into a brick wall at that speed. That would probably bust your nose and at least loosen teeth. If you hit it at 20mph, you hit twice as hard, and you'd have more than a broken nose. Speed up again to 25mph and you hit with 3Xs the energy.
As many want all the benefits of bike paths and trails, you've got to limit the speed. There are many cars on our highways that can near 200mph, yet they have the same speed limit that a clapped out Geo Metro has. Have only a speed limit, and if you've got something that will go twice as fast and want to let it out, pay the ticket if you get caught.
My opinion is that helmets should be required. Most anything you run into is going to be face/head first, and stats are that 82% of bicycle deaths are people not wearing one.
Keep it simple. Below is my State's law. Another RCW deals with age(16 no license required) and helmets.

RCW 46.04.169
Electric-assisted bicycle.

"Electric-assisted bicycle" means a bicycle with two or three wheels, a saddle, fully operative pedals for human propulsion, and an electric motor. The electric-assisted bicycle's electric motor must have a power output of no more than one thousand watts, be incapable of propelling the device at a speed of more than twenty miles per hour on level ground, and be incapable of further increasing the speed of the device when human power alone is used to propel the device beyond twenty miles per hour.

 

[eggaweb]

Ebikes are over regulated and at the same time under regulated. In Australia, the power limit is 250W and the speed limit is a paltry 20km/h. If you have a faster one, you can't register it in any way.

Here are my suggestions for Australian (and probably U.S.) conditions:

1. 1 horsepower per person (750W) with a nominal registration fee.
2. Speed limit of 25Mph (40Km/h) on level ground.
[strike]3. A special constant bell, like on a tram to warn pedestrians.[/strike]
4. Allow on foot paths with a max speed of 15kph.
5. 1Kw-5Kw = register as a moped with no allowance for freeways.
6. 5Kw+ = motorbike, allow on freeways if it reaches the speed required.

For car drivers:
1. An education campaign about ebikes.
2. Make the passing distance related to speed difference. Can pass closer if the speed difference is not too high. This needs to be at the discretion of the police.
3. The passing distance can be applied to all bike riders to allow lane splitting at low speeds when safe.

 

[greenspark]

Agree except for

3. A special constant bell, like on a tram to warn pedestrians.
Noise pollution. Europe has done fine with jingle bells. You just need to train pedestrians to listen for them

4. Allow on foot paths with a max speed of 15kph.
Only if the rider is required to stop and dismount when pedestrians are present (within four metres of the bike)

5. 1Kw-5Kw = register as a moped with no allowance for freeways.
6. 5Kw+ = motorbike, allow on freeways if it reaches the speed required.
An ebike is a bicycle frame with an electric motor. At 1 kw (actually in my opinion at 750w) the bicycle engineering ceases to be appropriate. At 5 kw+ it is insane. The problem comes when idiots want to build a motorbike up from a bicycle rather than understand the engineering required to create a durable frame, shocks, tyres, brakes, rims, bearings and all the other parts that must work together at higher speeds. If the high-powered bicycles are allowed on the road, expect that after the initial carnage, the politicians will revoke all the rules and we'll be back to draconian regs.

 

[liveforphysics]

Why regulate any 2 wheel EV in any way?

If one cares about safety, regulate the 5,000lbs carcinogen spewing high speed deathboxes.

 

[eggaweb]

When talking 1kw+, I failed to mention that you need to build a frame strong enough to match the power output; a frame that should pass tests and be registered.

The bell idea was a little silly, but you need to ring the bell more on an ebike and the sound is a hell of a lot less polluting than revving engines.

 

[greenspark]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/10629760/Woman-killed-riding-modified-e-bike

Woman killed riding modified e-bike

A coroner has raised concerns about modified electric bicycles after an Ashburton woman died in a collision with a truck. Ashburton rest home worker Donna Lusty died on May 22, 2012, when her scooter collided with a truck at the intersection of Grove Farm and Grahams roads in Tinwald, near Ashburton. The 50-year-old mother-of-three was riding a motor scooter that had been converted from a power-assisted pedal cycle. She went to make a right-hand turn and collided with a small truck being driven by an 18-year-old man. She died at the scene. In findings released today, Coroner Richard McElrea said Lusty had never held a driver's licence and had only 10 per cent of normal vision, an affliction she had suffered since birth. A statement from the truck driver said he saw the bike cross the road in front of him suddenly, leaving him no time to react. ''I heard the lady scream just before impact so she did see me at the last second,'' he said. A report from the NZ Transport Agency said the class of Lusty's vehicle needed to be questioned. The pedals on Lusty's bicycle had been removed and it was powered solely by its electric motor. It was believed the motor had a power output of more than 300 watts, meaning the vehicle should have been registered as a moped and was required to be up to warrant of fitness standards. Lusty should have also had a driver's licence and should have been wearing a motorcycle helmet instead of a bicycle helmet. McElrea said it was possible Lusty did not know about the legal requirements and her death highlighted the issue of modifying electric bikes to make them more powerful. Police National Headquarters told the coroner police recognised the complexity of applying legislation against altered and modified vehicles. Acting road policing national manager Inspector Peter McKennie said responsibility for classifying vehicles lay with the Ministry of Transport, but police were working with them to manage the issue. McElrea recommended police maintain oversight of modified vehicles until a better regulatory framework was introduced and should ensure modified vehicles were appropriately registered and inspected. He also recommended that Transport Minister Gerry Brownlee consider the ''facts of this case'' to help improve legislation regarding modified vehicles.

Break the rules, the Nanny state steps in. Note how in this article, the reporter calls it a "motor scooter that had been converted from a power-assisted pedal cycle". That is legalism, since an ebike over 300W is considered a moped in NZ. It sounds like she was almost blind, had a modified bike, and made a turn without seeing the truck. But what gets the headline? "Modified ebike." Not "Almost blind woman killed turning her bike in front of a truck".

 

[speedmd]

Step in front of the fast moving truck and you get killed also. Was speed a issue here? Sounds like if on a pedal only bike it would have made no difference. Headline here is "blind women rides in front of a moving truck", "and dies". Cops time is better off spent looking out for folks trying to do harm to others.

 

[liveforphysics]

Everytime a gas or diesel vehicle starts, the people around and in it are dosed with potentially deadly carcinogens. As it's driving through a neighborhood after a cold-start before the catalytic converter lights, it's visibly spewing vapors that contains contain over a hundred different chemicals proven to KILL PEOPLE and/or cause various cancers, even at extremely low doses. (with continued exposure)


The kinetic energy in an ebike, even the most overpowered types in the world, is simply insubstantial when compared to the status-quo powered transportation solutions.

My bicycle with me on it at 110mph (it's current gearing limited top speed) is 168kJ of energy to do destructive work with if you impacted into something.

Small SUV at 31mph creeping through a parking lot is packing 196kJ of energy to do destructive work with if it hit something, and it's MUCH wider and MUCH less capable of avoiding impacts.

If you look at reasonable sane bicycle speeds and weights like 50mph and 100kg rider+bike, you're at 24.2kJ of kinetic energy to potential damage something it crashes into, and that assumes the impact stopped it cold.

That's the same energy as a typical SUV crawling through a parking lot at 10.9mph... The SUV has radically worse capabilities to detect pedestrians or have an evasive solution to avoid impacts if they did detect them.

It is delusion to think that because a vehicle made a payment to the state to get a stamped piece of metal with some numbers and stickers that this makes them any safer. It's up to drivers discretion to use it in a way that doesn't kill people, the difference is it's simply orders of magnitude less dangerous to the things it impacts. I've been hit by both dirtbikes and bicycles, it's never caused more than some bruises and roadrash and I got up and laughed. I've only seen a couple people get hit by cars, they didn't get up or laugh, because they were too frocked up.

Any laws restricting LEV's of any type are unrelated to concerns of safety, they are the least dangerous, least destructive, and don't poison people as part of normal operation.

Any LEV someone makes and replaces driving a car/truck/SUV with is making the world a safer place in many different ways. Any rule or regulation that limits someone from choosing an LEV option and continuing to use a car/truck/SUV is diametrically opposed to both safety and public health even local economy (by not bleeding out your local wealth/resources to buying fuel to poison the air with).

 

[Ch00paKabrA]

Why regulate any 2 wheel EV in any way?

If one cares about safety, regulate the 5,000lbs carcinogen spewing high speed deathboxes.

I have to agree with LFP on this one.

think about it this way. When you propose a regulation, you are answering the question: Who do I want to prevent from having this?

So, for instance, let's say that you think that a modest registration fee of $100 per year would be a good idea. You have just eliminated people who have zero dollars expendable income. These are the folks that would benefit the most from the inexpensive nature of an ebike.

Any regulation you can dream up is simply a barrier of entry. Not good.

I like the Fed statute (or what ever it is) if it is under 750 watts, under 100 pounds, and goes no more than 20 mph then it is a bicycle. Otherwise, it is either a moped or a motorcycle and there are already sufficient regulations on the books for each example. So, no, there is no need for more regulation.

Let's take a poor person as an example. Around here, owning a car is very expensive. The bus costs $2 each way to travel around 10 miles or so. It would cost someone around $1,500 to take the bus every day to a job 10 miles away. This same person can buy a curry for half that and still have a 10 mile range. Regulations would increase the cost of ownership in some ways and perhaps put that out of the reach of the person that needs it most.

Also, who is going to enforce these regulations? Now it will be necessary to ad salaries to the police force, the clerks office, the judicial system, investigators, etc. Regulations also add bloat to government.

No regulations. that is the key.

 

[liveforphysics]

Vehicle registrations is just a sanctioned version of the mafia "protection" game.

You pay some money, you get a sticker that tells the goons not to terrorize/cage/attack/beat/kill etc.

Your stickers date passes by and you don't keep up on your 'protection' payments, the goons are unleashed on you.

However, the goons have taken the wealth and resources of the people to fund equipment and training to militarize with advanced technology and methods for terrorizing and murdering the citizens they are paid to "protect".

 

[gogo]

Vehicle registrations is just a sanctioned version of the mafia "protection" game.

You pay some money, you get a sticker that tells the goons not to terrorize/cage/attack/beat/kill etc.

Your stickers date passes by and you don't keep up on your 'protection' payments, the goons are unleashed on you.

However, the goons have taken the wealth and resources of the people to fund equipment and training to militarize with advanced technology and methods for terrorizing and murdering the citizens they are paid to "protect".

Have you ever seen LE tapping away on their laptops while patrolling in their cruisers? In Iowa, they can access vehicle registration information anytime they want and there is no accountability for doing so. There is no record kept of the action. With that information and other public databases they can decide who, where, how, and why to choose their next victim.

It happened to me.

When I complained to the Chief of Police via email about such actions I was treated to three personal appearances at my residence. When that failed to cause contact they called on my unlisted phone. Finally, they responded via email offering a phone conversation about my concerns. I asked for a copy of any written documentation concerning the officer's investigation of my concerns and his attempts to contact me and have not heard from them since, now a few months.

The system can be rigged against you and anything you say or do can and will be used against you by authorities.

 

[Eclectic]

I would love to see a new class of Light Vehicles. Their primary characteristic would be their inability to cause significant harm. That would mean limiting their speed and weight (regulate operator behavior, not vehicle power) and possibly size (because of particle issues) so that the amount of destructive energy is limited. This would allow for unlicensed operators and unregistered vehicles because it would be difficult injure each other. I don’t care how they are powered. Human power only, ICE (as long as they meet air and noise pollution standards), electric or hybrid.

The standard I think is appropriate is 20mph (32kph) and 350lbs (160kg) gross vehicle weight (vehicle + operator + cargo). Maybe even different speed limits for different weights. 15mph (24kph) @ 750lbs (340kg) and 10mph (16kph) @ 1000lbs (450kg).

This situation would work best if there were only light vehicles involved (this would mean infrastructure for light vehicles only). A different standard would be required for a combination of heavy (cars and trucks) and light vehicles and another standard for combined light vehicles and pedestrians.

Some other regulation might be needed like minimum operator age (16?) and maximum vehicle size (1m x 2m – maybe 4m with a trailer).

 

[liveforphysics]

Their primary characteristic would be their inability to cause significant harm. That would mean limiting their speed and weight (regulate operator behavior, not vehicle power) and possibly size (because of particle issues) so that the amount of destructive energy is limited.

What you just described is all ebikes. Does it really matter if they have 1kW motors or 30kW motors? Does it really matter if they weigh 50lbs or 120lbs? Does it really matter if they go 25mph or 70mph?

Is there anything you can even do in dangerously over powering a bicycle to make it have the sheer killing death and destruction capabilities of even a small lightweight economy car?

 

[greenspark]

What I am saying is simple:

Push the envelope, screw up, and the papers will report that it was the ebike motor's fault, rather than say: woman driving with 10% vision stupidly turns in front of a truck and killed herself". She pushed the envelop and now the minions in Wellington are trying to figure out how to regulate an industry that currently is left alone.

Putting up youtube videos branded "Death Bike V4.0" is waving a red flag in front of the regulators, they will love you and make sure the legislators see your video as justification for regulation. You're not pedalling. The only reason to have pedals is so you can call what obviously is a motorcycle frame an ebike. Rebrand it. Drop the Death adjective, since you certainly don't seem to want to have it kill you. It sounds funny, but you obviously have never met a humourless bureaucrat who writes regulations. I don't mean to be attacking you, but seriously, with friends like you in this forum and on YouTube, who needs enemies?

You can argue what is right until you are blue in the face. It won't make a difference. Using the word "should" won't make a difference. All the rants in the world do nothing except preach to the choir.

The only thing that makes a difference is when the citizen users form a legitimate group that presents itself as mature and prudent (not renegade) and advocates for an unarguable threshold that the legislators see as fair, so they tell the bureaucrats to focus on something more serious. The regulation should say that under that threshold, ebiking continues to be free, meaning no registration, licensing, inspection, road fees, insurance, drivers licenses, and hopefully no stupid laws (such as useless helmets for adults).

Among other things, that means defining an ebike not as a home-made electric moped or motorbike or Death Bike 4.0.

Define an ebike as a motor assist to a bicycle so it is easy to get up hills, go safe speeds and get more people out of cars onto bikes. Advocate for separate bike roads, like in Europe. Advocate for safety lock-ups so theft is not a problem (as ebikes become more common, batteries and motors will be new targets). The wattage definition is inadequate. I had a 500W 52V Mac that went fast enough to kill me. My 180W European ebike actually feels like it is supplying more torque than my 300W aftermarket kit. We need a simple threshold that any cop can check and let us go on our way. But to do that, this forum needs to get its act together, since it seems to be the primary place where users hang out.

Hence the question: What legal definition would let those of us who want bicycles to be easier to ride up hills and in stiff winds ride with an electric motor and still be considered a bicycle? Forget suicide speed, forget wheelies, forget renegades like Death Wish 4. Just a simple definition that ensures the rider is legal and left alone.

 

[Eclectic]

Is there anything you can even do in dangerously over powering a bicycle to make it have the sheer killing death and destruction capabilities of even a small lightweight economy car?

No - That is why light vehicles require separate infrastructure for heavy vehicles. But after more then 100 years of death and injury caused by cars and trucks, it has become obvious that the overwhelming majority of human beings on this planet feel that the benefits outweigh the negative aspects and that cars and trucks are not going away, so we need to come up with a plan to live with them.

Does it really matter if they have 1kW motors or 30kW motors? Does it really matter if they weigh 50lbs or 120lbs? Does it really matter if they go 25mph or 70mph?

Yes it does and I would assume that you know that. While a 500lbs vehicle going 70mph pales in comparison to the destructive energy of a 5,000lbs vehicle going 70mph it would still have enough energy to cause significant harm or death.

Hence the question: What legal definition would let those of us who want bicycles to be easier to ride up hills and in stiff winds ride with an electric motor and still be considered a bicycle? Forget suicide speed, forget wheelies, forget renegades like Death Wish 4. Just a simple definition that ensures the rider is legal and left alone.

I feel like I am privileged to be involved in something that is in it's infancy and that has the potential for very positive effect on all people living in an urban environment. As such I understand that my actions (however small) have the potential to influence the perception and regulation of light vehicles (ebikes in particular) in the near and long term future. I feel like I am somewhat of an ambassador and I try to make positive impressions and not make people look at me like this or this :? .

While it is difficult to ignore my emotions and look at things logically, I feel that it is important that I use logic in this case. What I am looking for is a situation that says "Give me some infrastructure and leave me alone and in return I will try not to cause any harm and society will benefit with lower infrastructure costs, lower health care costs, less pain and suffering...etc. etc. etc."

 

[Ch00paKabrA]

The system can be rigged against you and anything you say or do can and will be used against you by authorities.

I saw a video of a lawyer talking about why you should never talk to the police. The bottom line is that you need to take a careful look at the miranda rights.

It states that anything you say can and will be use against you. That is it. Against you. Nothing that you say to a LEO can be used for you; only against you.

If I am approached by a cop and he starts talking, I just say that I am sure that he is a nice guy but my lawyer told me that it is never a good idea to talk to you so have a nice day. I don't even carry ID any more because if they ask you for it you have to give it to them unless you don't have, then you only have to tell them your name and address. That is all they ever get out of me.

 

[liveforphysics]

The conceptual error I think some may have in this thread is confusing capabilities to accelerate with kinetic energy. If you get hit by a 200lbs bike+rider at 40mph or whatever, it doesn't matter if the bike had 40kW of power or 500W of power.

 

[gogo]

The system can be rigged against you and anything you say or do can and will be used against you by authorities.

I saw a video of a lawyer talking about why you should never talk to the police. The bottom line is that you need to take a careful look at the miranda rights.

It states that anything you say can and will be use against you. That is it. Against you. Nothing that you say to a LEO can be used for you; only against you.

If I am approached by a cop and he starts talking, I just say that I am sure that he is a nice guy but my lawyer told me that it is never a good idea to talk to you so have a nice day. I don't even carry ID any more because if they ask you for it you have to give it to them unless you don't have, then you only have to tell them your name and address. That is all they ever get out of me.

As a result of a consensual conversation with a LEO, he asked for my ID and I declined, suggesting that I be identified in his report as the apparent resident of the address in front of which we stood. Instead, the officer looked up the vehicle registration of the car in my driveway and assumed that was me. Then the officer recorded my full legal name, address, driver's license #, DOB, plate, vehicle description, and VIN # on the report. I got a copy of the incident report and they didn't redact any of the information protected by the Drivers Privacy Protection Act (DPPA).

Not only did the officer not respect my desire to keep my name out of searchable records, he used poor judgement and misused his special privilege to the data associated with a vehicle that was not involved with the incident under investigation. He guessed that I was the registered owner of the vehicle and then publicly published protected information!

Don't talk to the police!

Drivers Privacy Protection Act (DPPA)
The Drivers Privacy Protection Act safeguards the personal information of licensed drivers from improper use or disclosure. It is a valid exercise of federal authority in that it seeks to protect a fundamental privacy interest. It restricts the activities of states only to the extent that it concerns the subsequent use or disclosure of the information in a manner unrelated to the original purpose for which the personal information was collected. The states should not impermissibly burden the right to travel by first compelling the collection of sensitive personal information and then subsequently disclosing the same information for unrelated purposes.

To get back to the subject of the thread, this fellow citizen tried to maliciously sick the authorities on me concerning registration laws. He was pointing to a just rescued 1973 90cc motorcycle from a farmer's scrap yard. It was obviously a parts bike (frame only) and looked like it had laid fallow for 40 years. We are over-regulated and over-criminalized already. We don't need more crappy laws.

 

[greenspark]

The conceptual error I think some may have in this thread is confusing capabilities to accelerate with kinetic energy. If you get hit by a 200lbs bike+rider at 40mph or whatever, it doesn't matter if the bike had 40kW of power or 500W of power.

The title of this thread is "How would you write ideal ebike regulations". If regulations are based on protection, then we need to forget walking, biking or motorbiking and encase ourselves in airbagged cars. But they are not. They are written by bureaucrats whose natural tendency is to classify, legislate, and register. At present ebikes are free, the same as bicycles and shoes. However, ebikes are new to the regulators. While ebikes have been around for decades, the new batteries and motors are game changers, and people who have not ridden a bike since they were kids are discovering ebikes and falling in love with the experience. Because the battery/motor/controller industry is a continuum ranging from the gutless 250W Euro standard (fine for flat Berlin, worthless for hilly Switzerland) to the American overpowered, (and enthusiasts like liveforphysics can build killer-speed bikes in their garage), the risk of regulators getting it wrong is very high.

• We can sit by and do nothing
• We can write rants in this forum about government and police officers, rants that are totally ineffective
• We can start a serious dialogue about what constitutes a free ebike and press that it remain free.

1. My view is that a free (unregulated) ebike gets the rider up a steep hill without needing to wear bike clothes or take a shower when they get to the office, meaning at the top of the hill no sweat is staining the armpits
2. It also has a reasonable top speed above which the likelihood of serious injury if something goes wrong is unacceptably high.

My conundrum is how to convert those two outcomes into measurable numbers or a Seal of Approval on the bike that the police can check when an ebike rider does something that looks dangerous.
Wattage is a bad measure, because we really need torque going up the hill and real wattage is constantly varying without being dangerous.

We also need to look at ancillary requirements. If we put a free (unregulated) motor on, should we also be required to have a matching free standard for any other components to remain free?
I'm a fan of putting mid-mount motors on old bikes (I have two Raleigh DL-1's) and classic designs (a Bella Ciao - 3 speed) and love the results. Neither takes disk brakes, but with the DL-1, I respoked to take hub brakes because the 63 year old English brakes would not stop the bike with the speed of the Bafang BBS01 motor. Should there be some sort of ancillary requirements for retrofitting (or factory-new "junk" from China soon to be sold at Wallyworld)?

So I ask two questions:

1) Are the two standards I list (no sweat and speed limit) the right functional outcomes, or are there more, or other better standards?
2) What simple street-side inspection would enable a cop to verify if the ebike was in compliance with the standard?

 

[zener]

Why should ebikes be overregulated while cars are wayyyy underregulated ?

For instance:
We have the cars in my city which about 99% of the people are use who dont like public transportation system.
These have NO (nada; zero; 0) limits in power and speed. In the city is 50k/m h speed limit but all drive 70kmh becouse felony penalty starts only over 73km/h.
There are in the city constantly randomly pedestrians and cyclists run over to death all around from cars.

Than we have now these ebikes:
They have now thanks to technology progress the ability to transport a person even faster than cars from A to B in the city.
But they are thanks to mostly only 10-20kg more wight not much more dangerouse on a impact than conventional bicycles.
Beside that it hurts the driver of an ebike also if he crashes unlike the counterpart from above.


So my opinion is regulate the cars first. limit the cars power and speed and make much much harder penalty if a car driver lose control over his vehicle or otherwise act like dickhead.
After that we can talk about any if there should be one for ebikes.


P.S. Yeah i ride my ebike mostly unassisted and with 2500w 10x the legal limit also my motor spins to 60kph when ever i wisch and feel its safe to do so.
(i assist only if a need more range or when its cold outside or when i have to fakepedal becouse police may be looking or technical defects.)
Yep i have sold my car becouse i am now faster (especialy in rushhour) and its way cheaper in any means.

The conceptual error I think some may have in this thread is confusing capabilities to accelerate with kinetic energy. If you get hit by a 200lbs bike+rider at 40mph or whatever, it doesn't matter if the bike had 40kW of power or 500W of power.

The title of this thread is "How would you write ideal ebike regulations". If regulations are based on protection, then we need to forget walking, biking or motorbiking and encase ourselves in airbagged cars. But they are not. They are written by bureaucrats whose natural tendency is to classify, legislate, and register. At present ebikes are free, the same as bicycles and shoes. However, ebikes are new to the regulators. While ebikes have been around for decades, the new batteries and motors are game changers, and people who have not ridden a bike since they were kids are discovering ebikes and falling in love with the experience. Because the battery/motor/controller industry is a continuum ranging from the gutless 250W Euro standard (fine for flat Berlin, worthless for hilly Switzerland) to the American overpowered, (and enthusiasts like liveforphysics can build killer-speed bikes in their garage), the risk of regulators getting it wrong is very high.

• We can sit by and do nothing
• We can write rants in this forum about government and police officers, rants that are totally ineffective
• We can start a serious dialogue about what constitutes a free ebike and press that it remain free.

1. My view is that a free (unregulated) ebike gets the rider up a steep hill without needing to wear bike clothes or take a shower when they get to the office, meaning at the top of the hill no sweat is staining the armpits
2. It also has a reasonable top speed above which the likelihood of serious injury if something goes wrong is unacceptably high.

My conundrum is how to convert those two outcomes into measurable numbers or a Seal of Approval on the bike that the police can check when an ebike rider does something that looks dangerous.
Wattage is a bad measure, because we really need torque going up the hill and real wattage is constantly varying without being dangerous.

We also need to look at ancillary requirements. If we put a free (unregulated) motor on, should we also be required to have a matching free standard for any other components to remain free?
I'm a fan of putting mid-mount motors on old bikes (I have two Raleigh DL-1's) and classic designs (a Bella Ciao - 3 speed) and love the results. Neither takes disk brakes, but with the DL-1, I respoked to take hub brakes because the 63 year old English brakes would not stop the bike with the speed of the Bafang BBS01 motor. Should there be some sort of ancillary requirements for retrofitting (or factory-new "junk" from China soon to be sold at Wallyworld)?

So I ask two questions:

1) Are the two standards I list (no sweat and speed limit) the right functional outcomes, or are there more, or other better standards?
2) What simple street-side inspection would enable a cop to verify if the ebike was in compliance with the standard?

 

[Eclectic]

If you are talking about unlicensed operators and unregistered vehicles, then a regulation has to be designed for the lowest common denominator. I am sure that most here are much more proficient than that but without a licensing process to prove that proficiency, you would have to write something that said that ANYONE could follow these guidelines and not cause significant harm to themselves or others. The easiest way to limit the amount of harm that can be done is to limit the size, weight and speed. Those are all simple quantities that could be derived by educated observation or empirically. If you regulate the behavior and do not care what the power source is, the maximum power of the vehicle becomes irrelevant just like the maximum power is irrelevant in a car or truck. What is relevant is the behavior of the operator.

 

[liveforphysics]

We already have ebike laws.

They are someone's delusions about ebikes <1kW and <25mph.

The ideal ebike law would be similar, but without the power or speed nonsense involved.

 

[Eclectic]

So my opinion is regulate the cars first. limit the cars power and speed and make much much harder penalty if a car driver lose control over his vehicle or otherwise act like dickhead.
After that we can talk about any if there should be one for ebikes.

Why should we be any different than a car? They are regulated on their size, weight, and speed. Because of their potential for causing harm, they have a lot of extra safety regulations attached to them. I want to say "If I don't go too fast or weigh too much, then I'm not a safety hazard so you can leave me alone."

There is no distinction between cars that are powered by gasoline, electricity, alcohol or compressed cow farts...why should there be a distinction for light vehicles?

The other part of the equation is to say "My friends and I are good for society so give us infrastructure please."

 

[Eclectic]

Think of it this way. If a regulation was written that only concerned itself with speed, weight and size (and not power). If you got noticed riding a very fast bike, it would only be a speeding ticket. You would not have an illegal bike that might be subject to confiscation.

I would prefer not see as little regulation as possible. Fortunately or unfortunately this ebike thing may be nearing critical mass in the foreseeable future. That would seem that regulation is inevitable. I think the OPs point was he would rather have a voice in how that happens (not if it will happen) and would rather not be stuck with having to have people running in front us waving red lanterns.

 

[amberwolf]

1) Are the two standards I list (no sweat and speed limit) the right functional outcomes, or are there more, or other better standards?
2) What simple street-side inspection would enable a cop to verify if the ebike was in compliance with the standard?

"no sweat" here in Phoenix means the assist would have ot have the power to do ALL of the work of going at a hair under 20MPH (the present AZ speed limit for assists) all the way up hills like 7th Street at North Mountain, and trips for 50+ miles, in 120F+ degree heat, for heavy cargo bikes with full several-hundred-pound loads (and/or riders).

Why bother with a "power" limit? What possible difference does it make how much power you have on tap, if you use it responsibly? Presently AZ trusts us to do that, and harshly treats those that don't. (see further below)

As for a quick way to verify? There isn't one, for power--they'd have to have a portable well-calibrated dynamometer in every LE vehicle AND be trained in it's use. That's the only way there is to actually verify the exact power to the road of any wheel.

But if you use only speed to verify compliance, it's easy--pretty much every LE vehicle already has speed radar built in, or a handheld unit they can simply point at you, or they can pace you and see how fast you're going, if their speedo is accurate. If you're going faster than the regulation allows, then they do whatever it is they do. Otherwise they leave you alone, just like every other vehicle on the road.

Do they roadside test cars for power? Weight? Etc? No, they watch their speed and stop them if they are greatly exceeding the posted limits. Sure, those are registered/insured/licensed/etc., but it's a whole lot simpler and cheaper to do.

If a regulation mandates that other things besides actual speed at that moment be checked, it is going to increase costs and time spent on these things, which means either it will never be enforced, or it will cost a lot to do, and take time out of much more important duties, requiring more officers to do the enforcing, and more training for all of them to do it right (or lots of costly mistakes).

Think of it this way. If a regulation was written that only concerned itself with speed, weight and size (and not power). If you got noticed riding a very fast bike, it would only be a speeding ticket. You would not have an illegal bike that might be subject to confiscation.

Unfortunately that isn't necessarily true.

The way definitions work in many states in the USA, if your vehicle doesn't fit one of the classifications (be that by operator usage or by it's capabilities), it's often ticketed as an illegal vehicle.

For example, here in AZ, because assisted bicycles are defined as being "operated under 20MPH", but no other limitations (for electric--there is a CC limit on ICE versions) regarding the assist itself, the way they are often ticketed if found over that speed (in Tucson they can be extremely strict about it), is to give "the big three": riding a motorcycle without a license, insurance, or registration, and the bike is impounded. I suppose "motorcycle" is chosen as the violation because it would be more severe than "moped", but I don't really know. Either way, they do this because "you can't be riding an assisted bicycle if it's going faster than 20MPH, so it must be a next-higher class of vehicle, and thus the vehicle must be registred and insured, and you must be licensed to operate it", so the "logic" goes.

I don't know how any of the cases worked out in court, for anyone that has fought it.

I just make sure to follow that <20MPH speed limit, myself, and I ride on the roads with traffic. There arent' actually bike lanes in most of the areas and streets I have to ride in (or they are full of parked cars), so typically I don't even use those, unless I am doing a really long trip east-west or north-south on a route that lets me use such paths (whcih hardly ever have any other bicycles on them at all), or to a place I can use one of the canal paths (which do have pedestrians and cyclists on them but not very many and pretty far apart, most of the time).




However, for my purposes, most especially the ability to G.T.F.O.O.T.W. of much larger vehicles that suddenly want to be where I already am, I do require the ability to very quickly accelerate out of their way (because braking is often not a possible or safe way to avoid them due to other traffic or road conditions).

I also need the power to haul quite a large load even up steep hills (we have very few but there are some doozies, and the canal paths have underpasses on major roads that are steep ramps into and out of them), without any pedal input because I can't even hardly pedal just *me* on a regular bike anymore, much less with any kind of load, and certainly not with the big cargo bike (crazybike2) that I presently use.

Personally I see no reason to limit the *p ower* or weight, though a "reasonable" speed limit like 20MPH doesn't bother me much; I'm not usually in a big hurry to get anywhere anyway.

Most of the weight limits I've seen preclude many useful cargo bikes (including mine), unless they don't include the weight of the motor or batteries. And for those stuck with heavy chemistries like SLA and NiCd and NiMH, battery weight to do what I need to do would be as much as the entire weight limit for the bike in some places!

I would guesstimate my bike presently weighs around 170lbs, and is going to gain at least another 15-20lbs "soon" when I add a useful rear suspension that can handle the weights of cargo and bike I deal with, vs the potholes and bumps we have.


If I ever get to build the trike version, it'll almost certainly be at least 20-30lbs more than that.

If I ever build a velomobile type, it'd be even more.

If I ever get to build the dog-transport trike (rather than hauling them in a trailer, a dedicated trike designed around moving at least a couple of St. Bernards around), I imagine that one will be near or even over 300lbs by itself, not necessarily including all of the battery that I would need on it to do the longer trips.

For me, my bike is not just transportation for myself, it's also transport for those dogs, and for their food, and for everything else I need to move around, including the junk collected to build them from in the first place.

Another consideration is that I don't have any disposable income (which is a primary reason I build my stuff out of other people's discards), so if registration fees and insurances and whatnot become necessary, I'll probably become another of those people walking (well, hobbling with a cane or more likely in a wheelchair for these distances) pushing shopping carts for miles and miles and hours and hours to get what I need done. (with all the cost increases, and the cutbacks at work, I generally barely make enough nowadays to cover rent, let alone food for the dogs and myself, or water or electricity. Occasional trades of work for stuff/etc. help me with that, but it's a downward spiral at present.



I'm most certainly not alone in these problems, either--there's a lot of cyclists around here using makeshift trailers of various types to haul stuff and themselves that no longer make enough money to own a car (but would rather drive than ride if they could). Most of them don't have any assists, but if they did and were required to register/insure them, the costs would force them to either start walking or buck the system and risk whatever fines or jailtime the regulations require for not paying up.


I'm one of a minority at present, but there are more and more cargo cyclists all the time, who have actually replaced their ICE vehicles with them. Some use motor assists on them, and the number of those is increasing too. Some are like me and just don't have the money to run a car, but some have plenty of money and just choose to no longer do the car thing for whatever reason.




So we all need to be factored into any "regulations" as well.