Alan K

I agree and I can hardly blame them.
There was a time when motor cyclists were asked to wear a helmet, a mandatory requirement. Some people were very unhappy and thought of this requirement as infringement of their personal freedom. This is a sort of self-limiting problem, given that motor cycle accidents don’t usually kill others on the road (unlike distracted/drunk car drivers).

Bicycling is something I have always enjoyed but to me it is not something of a calling where I would proselytize others into doing what I do. Heck, I couldn’t even convince my oldest friend to ride one just for exercise - bought one for him years ago, and it sits in his garage. People do what they feel comfortable doing and it’s fine, especially if reasons have to do with their safety, perceived or real.

dayco

Although I'm new to all this, it seems to me the main difference between 'throttled' and 'PAS' is that they don't trust us to abide by the law. If I'm understanding it correctly, in most parts of the US they use the generally accepted 3 class system. Class1&2 are limited to 20mph. Class3 to 28mph. Class1&3 are PAS only while Class2 can be PAS and/or throttled. To be legal, all three Classes have a 750 watt 1 hp max whether electric or gas powered.

This is what bugs me. Only Class 1 PAS/only are allowed on the bike trails. Why? If Class1&2's power and speed (I'm sure Class 3 can travel under 28mph) are the same why can only PAS/Class 1 travel the bike trails but not throttled/Class 2 or even Class 3? They're only trusting the onboard computer to limit the bike to 20 mph, not you.

mschwett 

some interesting points here. the EU 250w limit was never described as a “peak” power limit. it is the nature of an electric motor - same motor, more current, more power… it may survive or it may not, so the standard is written around continuous power. in a world with hills and very different power requirements to accelerate vs cruise, it’s not the worst thing in the world. it can certainly be abused, but when paired with the speed limits it works well enough. you only need to look to how many e-bikes are in use in Europe and how vanishingly few incidents there are.

the fundamental problem with the “limit speeds on the road / path, don’t limit the vehicle” argument is that cars and motorcycles are registered and insured. in the US, e-bikes, including 28mph 750w ones, are not. you also have vulnerable users on those same bike lanes and paths, not wrapped in steel and airbags, and too much of a discrepancy in vehicle design WOULD be dangerous, which is what the OP was envisioning with the e cargo train.

e-bikes of all classes are extremely common here, ridden by everyone from soccer moms with their kids on the back to delivery drivers and athletes on recovery rides. i have a couple. i have never heard of an e-bike vs pedestrian incident, and can’t really say that the cycling etiquette of e bike riders is any different than the average casual rider, tourist, etc. the only group which seem to be uniformly more disrespectful of other users are the hardcore one wheel guys, swerving back and forth constantly at high speed through roads or MUPs, blacked out in head to toe protective gear. they probably need it !

dayco

I see what you're saying. But what if you're pedaling your carbon fiber bike down a trail right now at 22mph and you hit someone? Most people would/should stop. And why only stop at abusing us untrustworthy Class2&3 e-cyclists? If someone's driving down the road in their car and their car spots a 35mph speed limit let's have the computer limit the car's speed to 35mph. We can't trust those car drivers...they hit us cyclists.

Whether its a trail user walking their dog waiting for it to crap or a speeding cyclist doing 22mph in a 10mph area, I would like to think trail rules are fair. Like everyone else, I pay taxes to maintain and use the trail.

mschwett 

in a zillion years of road biking, there are relatively few incidents of cyclists hitting pedestrians, and the large (but not large enough!) sums of money spent on the infrastructure were spent with rules in mind, just like the rules of the road. those rules include speed limits, power limits (in some cases none!) etc which acknowledge the range of speeds and reaction times of the elderly, kids, dogs, cyclists, etc. very few serious roadies ride on MUPs where there is an alternative, around here several of them are signed “faster cyclists use roadway bike lane” and there is a bike lane on the adjacent road.

we all pay lots of taxes for lots of things, that definitely doesn’t give anyone the right to ignore the rules. definitely gives you the right to lobby for different rules, which is happening and i think most municipalities are doing a decent job of it with a mix of speed limits and vehicle limits and other use limits.

as for motor vehicles … there’s a whole army of peace officers and regulations and courts that deal with the consequences of going faster than the speed limit. i really think we don’t want want (nor can we afford it) for bikes. as much as people complain about it, the current class system works OK IMO, leaving it up to cities and counties to determine which classes are allowed where and providing a pretty wide range of vehicle types. i might add a class “0,” which would be intended to be legal absolutely everywhere a bicycle is, with a 15mph cutoff and an absolute 250w max.

downtube42

I went to Nijmegen, Netherlands twice this year for business, and biked extensively. What shocked me were three things - the percentage of vehicles on the paths that were motorized (ICE and E), the aggressiveness of the motorized vehicle drivers, and the speed differential between motorized 2-wheelers and the rest of us. Clearly, many of the motorized 2-wheelers were delivery vehicles, and those drivers were the most aggressive.

As a pedestrian, it was a frickin mess.

On the one hand, I'm glad all those deliveries are happening with 2-wheelers rather than cars. On the other hand, something needs to change else pushbikes are going to be pushed off the paths. And that would be a real shame IMO.

I'm guessing they will come up with an infrastructure solution, not just regulations.

linberl

Assuming throttles are always used in lieu of pedaling is a mistake. Many riders with arthritis in knees or other health issues use a throttle on take off as pedal assist requires some rotation to begin. Those initial movements can be very hard on older joints. Additionally, as someone who rides in city traffic sometimes (and other times on MUPs where they exist), a throttle can make the difference between being hit by a car or not. Unfortunately my throttle has saved me from being broadsided in intersections by bad drivers more than once. There is no way I could have pedaled out of the way in time; the added boost from the throttle let me clear by enough space so that the driver running the red light didn't hit me. I have no problem with bikes having both pedal assist and throttles - throttle only bikes should be reserved only for disabled riders.

Smaug1

Well, to answer the OP's question, the line is drawn (in the US) for MUPs at Class 1 or 2. 20 mph max. Some municipalities have lower limits; 15 mph is common.

You can go and look up your state's laws just like I did for more clarification.

How we FEEL about those laws and whether/how well they're enforced is something different. Many pages of posts in many threads have been typed about it already. We have guys that want to ride 50 mph offroad electric motorcycles with vestigal pedals and then we have guys who think it should be pedal assist only, and only up to 15 mph. Then, everything between.

Smaug1

(deleted)

Leisesturm

The number one opinion of the majority of people on BF is that an e-bike is 'cheating'. Especially if it has any kind of throttle in the system. The number two opinion of the majority of people on BF is that those tiny batteries cannot possibly allow a round trip of 100 mi. The people buying e-bikes in the US are doing it at the point of an existential gun. They don't like the prices, the fact that they are lower than whale poop cheaters, and they are terrified of the learning curve of usage. But they NEED the damn things. That kind of consumer base does not equal robust sales.

The lack of 'infrastructure' is second to the culture that terrorizes pedestrians and cyclists alike into near paralysis. Drivers might be aggressive in the EU but it is understood that if a driver ever kills or even injures seriously a vulnerable pedestrian or road sharer ... well, that's that, isn't it. Game over. There aren't many defenses that fly over there for killing a cyclist. "Ik heb hem niet gezien" isn't going to get very far in getting State charges dismissed.

It simply cannot compare, the near total, lack of interest in vehicular cycling in the U.S., and the wholesale adoption of vehicular cycling in the EU. It isn't that e-bikes sell better there, ALL bikes sell better in a culture where cycling is participated in by just about every cohort of humanity.

Bonzo Banana

The EU certification is written that at 250W the motor will maintain its temperature but at 251W in essense it would start to overheat so many have said that there is no maximum rating but of course in the real world such a motor could only be used lets say 10% over that rating without too much heat damage etc but in reality motors are being used to 900W and hugely different motors are being certified with completely different thermal properties as 250W. Also hub motors are much more effectively cooled as there is more motor mass, they are surround by a spinning fan (the wheel), they have less or no internal gearing or belts and the heat generating controller is external so under those rules hub motors should be allowed far higher wattage. As far as I understand it the US regulations are far more honest and engineering focused. Yes a 750W rated motor might peak at over a 1000W etc but the continuous rating is pretty accurate even if sellers like to call a 750W motor a 1000W motor due to its peak values. I don't think the motor mountings are a conspiracy although a standard mid-drive motor mounting is possible that all companies would use would be my preference. The possible conspiracy is the fact that some ebikes are given a 250W rating where as other less powerful ebikes are not, the certification seems manipulative and confusing in order to promote short life and expensive European products. However its also possible the certification is just written by someone incredibly incompetent or naïve and took too much information from European manufacturers which skewed the certification. The certification is also heavily against throttles which is the most common power control method in the world, it's electronically simple and gives the rider full control of power and when to use it. It helps the elderly, weak and disabled use ebikes more easily. It should not be legislated against. In the UK we have had to setup a 250W LPM sub class of moped which operates the same as ebikes (no helmet, insurance etc) in order to help such people get access to ebikes. It's messy legislation which not everyone understands in order to work around the EU legislation but as far as I can tell those ebikes need to be actually 250W as all of them seem to use fairly low power hub motors, I've not seen any with 900W mid-drive motors that call themselves 250W.

Jay Turberville

I hope not. The e-bike is a good niche that I think can help more people exploit the benefits of low speed health oriented transportation. The key is to keep the e-bike as being something similar to conventional bicycles. So cargo bikes, bikes with a small trailer, etc. make sense to me. But when the combined device with passenger(s) and cargo starts to get over 500 lbs or so, I think we've lost the plot. That's not to say that there isn't a place for these vehicles. But putting them under the umbrella of conventional bicycle laws will probably not work out in the long run. They will need another class.

Jay Turberville

I 100% agree. I think you could add a weight limit as well. But that's it. It works well for cars and it is the kind of thing that police are well versed in enforcing. It is much harder to enforce wattage limits for a variety of reason. And in many cases what is meant by a specified wattage is ambiguous at best. Furthermore, low wattage limits limit the practicality of DIY conversions via hub motors.

Jay Turberville

I think the argument is that by keeping the power low, the e-bike is still perceived as being far more bicycle-like than motorcycle-like. There's a point to that, but I think speed limits are a better approach and allow more versatile and flexible bicycles while still keeping the e-bike more bicycle-like than motorcycle-like.

Leisesturm

Taken in its entirety, that last post just shows how little you actually know about the subject of e-motors and e-bikes. This thread/forum really isn't the place for you to get up to speed. But, look at the quoted. Spinning fan? Spokes are NOT a fan. Both hub and mid-drive motors are poorly (air) cooled, because really effective air cooling would also let in water! So, while the stationary magnets can be cooled by direct thermal conduction to the motor housing, the spinning magnets cannot. This creates an upper limit for heat dissipation for both types of motor. The mid-drive can at least be geared to need less torque (power) for the same road speed. That's why mid-drives are more efficient than hub motors. Given that you know so little about all this, I just don't see how we can believe your claims that EU motors are using voltage x current profiles that result in 900W being put through 250W claimed e-motors. I simply don't believe that it is happening. I do know that there are easy ways to bypass factory settings and get motors to perform beyond their factory ratings. Speed is usually the goal. However, the motor has to have been constructed in such a way that when the increased power is put to it that it can survive the abuse. Will it? Depends of course. I just don't think there is much there there. No one is building 30mph potential into a motor and then selling it to the public with a 20mph limit. It simply is not happening. Were I you I would forget everything I think I know about all this and start from scratch again consulting only vetted sources of information. Good luck.

Jay Turberville

The legislation here is often no more honest. Typically, they specify 750W, but give no specification for how that is measured. So it is only "honest" in the sense that it should be clear to anyone involved that they have a lot of fudge factor to play with. Frankly, I think the numbers are there mostly to placate the less interested public who mostly won't think it through. And that's why I consider it "dishonest" - even if it works favorably to my preferences.

As I've said elsewhere, I think regulating by wattage - at least in fractions of horsepower - is inferior to legislating based on speed and vehicle/rider weight.

Jay Turberville

So, just regulate the speed by setting an upper speed limit for power assist. Many cyclists can easily hit 25 mph for a bit on their own. Fit cyclists go even faster. And downhill, I routinely exceed 30 mph. Speed and weight are the issues, not power.

A 250 watt assist on a hub motor is of vanishingly small usefulness going up an incline. It is of more use on a mid-drive where the motor can be made to operate in a more efficient RPM. But mid-drives are significantly more expensive and complicated. It would be better if legislation didn't disfavor the simpler and less expensive option so much.

Alan K

You can’t possibly mean it!
Would you have preferred to be hit?

Obviously everyone has their own experiences and subjective perceptions.
Thus far, I have not been hit by any evil motorist from the rear who was driving like a demon and I needed to get out his or her way like a bat outa hell with its tail on fire… and that could have only been done by a powerful motor.

On the other hand, I have also witnessed bicyclist in NY decades ago who take absurdly crazy risks on the road, as they ride between lanes, cursing and swearing at drivers. In fact, if isn’t for drivers good brakes and decent reaction times, many of these bicyclists would at least need a visit to a hospital.
I was informed by my friend who lives in Manhattan that many of these crazy bicyclists are messengers who deliver local mail/small packages between various business, and time being money, they are willing to take risks.

Alan K

Next thing you know, you will start complaining about being too slow in adopting the metric system!
Just so you know, we did give it a shot of sorts. Around 1982 or so I remember seeing signs posted on highways using both miles and km. But a few years later, km gradually disappeared.

Unless you can bring a dictatorial system of governance to US (disguised as whatever one hopes might sell easily… carbon credit, good for environment, steaks pooping too much etc), irrespective of what you or I may think, it would have almost no effect. You do realize that we have the best government money can buy. If you don’t like some legislations, buy legislators to fix the problem spots… or so they say.

linberl

You have misinterpreted what I wrote, "unfortunately" refers to the fact that I had the need to use my throttle because of bad drivers. Bike messengers are not normal cyclists; they are paid based on the speed of their deliveries, not different from auto delivery drivers who also drive dangerously. When we actually enforce regulations against them, we can talk about bike delivery regulation. Cars being driven for cash based on speed are way more dangerous than bikes for the same purpose.

Leisesturm

It's been the case for decades that every vehicle licensed by the DOT for use on American roads has the potential to reach 100 mph to 120 mph on level ground. The VAST majority never even see 90 in their lifetimes. Quite a number never even hit 60 mph. As much cager speeding as is reported here, the crowded road conditions prevailing in large cities where millions upon millions of drivers spend their working lives, the speed limits are 15, 20 (school zone), 25, 30, 35, 40/45 (arterial), 55 (national hwy) and there are 70 and 75 Western State limits. 120 mph? In your dreams buddy. But a 4500lb econo sedan that didn't have at least 95 hp is not going to get its own weight up a 15% incline and an auto manufacturer cannot know for a fact that their vehicle once it leaves the factory won't ever be thus challenged. So they have to make 95 hp available, which results in the potential to go 120 mph, but speed regulations, speed cameras, law enforcement supervision AND drivers with cell phones report abusers, and mostly, 85% of drivers obey the speed limits posted to the letter. 10% are 5mph to 10mph over, and the rest are too infrequent to worry about. Even they aren't regularly exceeding posted speed limits with any regularity.

Y'all ought to watch a YouTube review of a Class III e-bike sometime. When you see what it takes from rider and machine to reach an honest 28mph and stay there for even one minute ... mostly it does not happen. The majority of Class III 750W high performance e-bikes are ridden at 'normal' e-bike speeds. Thanks to the (usually) superior R&D necessary for Class III compliance, the bikes that make that cut will be more enjoyable at Class I & II speeds, and will get back down to zero mph much more quickly. I'm putting it out there that a lot of people that have a lot to say about how much power e-bikes should have and/or how fast they should be allowed to go, do not have any intention of actually owning an e-bike themselves. They want e-bikes neutered to even below 'push bike' levels for the good of us all.

Someone said earlier that they believe that when some hooligan going 22 mph on an e-bike smacks into a pedestrian that they should stop. I don't know, I think they WILL stop. I don't think they or the pedestrian that is hit will be going anywhere (except to a trauma center) else that day. I think if e-bikes were hitting peds at even 1/10 the rate that cars are hitting peds that we would know about it.

This thread exists because of the o.p. worry that e-bikes will become e-monsters that will ... I don't know. Even that cargo train wouldn't likely kill anyone it hit. I think the greater enemy is still the car! Let's not lose sight of that. Cars are killing us all in so many different ways that, were it more known exactly how and why, they would be immediately restricted to a needs based use paradigm. We should not be against any advancement of e-bike technology.

Alan K

For an average motorist on road, all bicyclists are a single group of people - bicyclists. Because a subset of them is a menace, it effects opinions about the rest.

dayco

I'm not making this up.

I made a g-bike. I've put on over 1300 miles riding the streets and roads around here. I'm usually traveling between 10 and 14mph. While putt-putting around town I've been passed many times by people pedaling their bicycles. It doesn't bother me because I realize just because I can go 20mph I don't have to go 20mph.

late

I have a 2017 Shimano 250 watt mid-drive motor. It's the difference, for me, between riding and not riding. Maine is hilly, but with the motor I can go up most of them.

However, regulating speed is prob the best choice.

We can argue about what that speed should be later. In a place like the Netherlands where a lot of people ride, severely limiting speed makes a lot of sense..

Smaug1

Well, here I think you are the one who is mis-informed. It happens all the time. Manufacturers are building bikes capable of 30+ mph, then limiting them in firmware to 20 mph. This way, they can sell them as Class 2 and side-step most legal liability.

The customers are then able to unlock the higher-performance firmware with some specific button-pressing sequences; they get the higher speed they wanted and the manufacturer is able to disavow liability, since it was technically a customer modification, and they gave full disclosure that that mode is for "off-road use only".

Police in the US are by and large reasonable people. They are not going after eBikers unless they're being irresponsible. I think it is maybe different in Europe, where they maybe focus more on the letter of the law, rather than the intent?