Throttles and California

[gromike]

Just read this about the new California ebike restrictions, and thought I'd pass it on:

Starting today, California is coming for your e-bike throttles

Last September, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law SB-1271, which redefines and adds to several electric bicycle regulations in...

electrek.co

 

[harryS]

The original California law left no room for throttles on class 3 in my opinion, This latest clarification appears to reassert that, but still allow owner to modify their class 3s'. That's stupid. If you don't want bikes going over 20 mph on throttle. just say so,. That's a click bait headline from electek anyway, Nothing is going to happen,

Meanwhile. it's actually the local agencies banning throttles in their parks and paths that really matters.

 

[m@Robertson]

The throttle issue is nothing. The law allows a walking throttle which means a bike can be sold with a throttle, and can have a throttle. People will still be unlocking them and nothing will change.

The real issue with this legislation is the absolute 750w cap on power output. I was pointing this out in the thread that discussed this bill as it was going thru the legislative process. A hard 750w limit effectively renders every 48v ebike no longer an ebike. There is no grandfather clause of any kind. Its a hard black-and-white limit. And it was inserted into the bill late in the process (the bill's original intent was about battery safety regulation).

It remains to be seen if this 750w limit is going to be enforced. If it is, given that a typical 48v ebike has a peak output in the 1400w range, when people buy ebikes under the new restriction they are going to be pissed at how severe it is. And since there is no grandfather clause, zillions of purchased ebikes that were once categorized as ebikes are suddenly no longer within legal compliance. Given that, I don't think there's much likelihood of successful enforcement over the long term. But in the short term an overzealous city council could make local residents' lives miserable the way NYC once did to its riding citizens.

Even in the EU with their 250w limit, manufacturers play the same shell game and so even an EU-spec "250w" bike is typically exceeding 750w in peak output.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

A hard 750w limit effectively renders every 48v ebike no longer an ebike.

Specialized SL 1.1 motor is 48 V, and its peak power is just 240 W.
You guys in the U.S. have just got used to the throttle and over-powering of e-bikes.

 

[gromike]

Specialized SL 1.1 motor is 48 V, and its peak power is just 240 W.

I'd like to see an accurate readout of that bike at maximum power. From my experience living in hilly country (and I'm pretty darn fit for 70+), 240 watts would not be enough power -- unless it's an incredibly light ebike.

As far as California's law, it's unenforceable. Though I guess it could be used as a cudgel on almost any ebiker in the good ol' USA.

 

[Chargeride]

Thats mechanical wattage, does that require more electrical wattage to obtain?

 

[Stefan Mikes]

The SL 1.1 motor draws 303 W from the battery at the peak power. It is something that is measurable.

The bike weighs 17 kg or 35 lbs on average. It is made for cyclists, not for the people who carry their asses using the throttle.

 

[gromike]

When I want to pedal I ride a bicycle. When I ride to and from work, I'm not so much into pedaling and use an ebike.
Sometimes a throttle seems like a good idea.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

When I want to pedal I ride a bicycle. When I ride to and from work, I'm not so much into pedaling and use an ebike.
Sometimes a throttle seems like a good idea.

The point is to be limited to 20 mph when using the throttle.
The U.S. e-bike class is totally misunderstood. An e-bike of a certain Class remains in this class. You cannot modify the class as you please, by adding or removing the throttle or placing a fake sticker on the frame.

I only countered the opinion of Matt that any 48 V e-bike is automatically illegal. Not the case. On the other hand, the EU laws do not permit anything above 48 V in the e-bike.

 

[Dewey]

I only countered the opinion of Matt that any 48 V e-bike is automatically illegal. Not the case.

While the new California law could be interpreted to imply an absolute 750w peak power limit in that state, @Jeremy McCreary's post on the legislation thread suggests the revised wording may not apply to controller set peak power because it specifically refers to the power rating only of the motor. 48v ebikes can have controller settings programmed to bring peak power under the legal limit. For example Lyft/Motivate Bikeshare 2nd generation Class 1 ebikes in NYC & DC use 52v batteries but claim a 350w power rating. They would have had to program the controllers to 7a current to achieve that. However given the real-world performance of these heavy single-speed Lyft ebikes climbing hills I predict if you put a watt meter on one of those bikes you would measure peak power at least 750w, and likely more. At a guess Lyft / Motivate program the controllers to 15-20a, given how they perform. This does suggest the more likely applications of the new California law may include requiring removing throttles from Class 3, and mandating UL certified batteries on new ebike sales.

 

[lnanek]

From what I've seen over here in Cali, for enforcement, that police will pace you in their cruiser. If you go over 30mph, boom. If you go over 20 without pedaling, boom. So not much change. It isn't like some European countries where they will put your bike on a dynamo yet.

 

[jabberwocky]

We can thank all the "I want a motorcycle but don't want to have to bother with registration/insurance/safety regs and also want to ride it on ped/bike infra" crowd for this. Probably a harbinger of whats to come in a lot of other states/localities. From where I sit, pretty much everyone except ebikers are rapidly getting fed up with being forced to share space with what are basically motorcycles, and those chickens are coming home to roost.

 

[jabberwocky]

I also expect to see more of this in the future:

Super73 sued over the legality of its e-bikes in California

FAIRFAX, Calif. (BRAIN) — A woman has filed a class-action lawsuit against manufacturer Super73 for selling e-bikes that can exceed the maximum speed allowance for a micromobility device.The lawsuit filed by California resident Hillary Whitman on Dec. 10 in Marin County Superior Court alleges...

www.bicycleretailer.com

 

[m@Robertson]

I only countered the opinion of Matt that any 48 V e-bike is automatically illegal. Not the case. On the other hand, the EU laws do not permit anything above 48 V in the e-bike.

Yeah but your example is just there for argumentation. You are willfully ignoring obvious reality by citing an ancient outlier. A 48v bike has a 54.6v charge at 100%. In order for a 48v system to fit under the 750w absolute limit, it has to have a controller whose PEAK output is no more powerful than 13a, which yields a 710w bike. 14 amps makes the bike 764w and thus illegal. And if you know anything about USA ebike sales, a 13a controller on a 48v system is essentially nonexistent. Unless you get some guy in Europe trying to start an argument for the sake of it. Again

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

I also expect to see more of this in the future:

Super73 sued over the legality of its e-bikes in California

FAIRFAX, Calif. (BRAIN) — A woman has filed a class-action lawsuit against manufacturer Super73 for selling e-bikes that can exceed the maximum speed allowance for a micromobility device.The lawsuit filed by California resident Hillary Whitman on Dec. 10 in Marin County Superior Court alleges...

www.bicycleretailer.com

Go girl! Hoping Surron is next.

Recently rode to a local open space to see if I had ebike access. Turned out to be an ecological reserve banning all bicyles.

But I could see the beginning of the trail I was hoping to ride, and it was totally torn up with tracks that were surely from high-power Surrons, Super73s, and the like. A high school was nearby.

I've seen the process live in other public open spaces here: Mid-teen and older males on these e-motorcycles physically destroying the trails with rooster tails, donuts, and incessant wheelies and screaming past hikers at 30+ mph — often in packs.

Result: No ebike access in any of these places now, and in many, no bike access at all.

As @jabberwocky noted above, much reputational damage to ebiking has already been done. But a crackdown could still help.

Realistically, law enforcement won't be able to put much manpower into a crackdown, as they're already seriously understaffed in our part of San Diego County. But it wouldn't take much to rack up some splashy examples and give these little jerks and their parents something to think about. Word would spread through the schools like wildfire.

 

[m@Robertson]

While the new California law could be interpreted to imply an absolute 750w peak power limit in that state, @Jeremy McCreary's post on the legislation thread suggests the revised wording may not apply to controller set peak power because it specifically refers to the power rating only of the motor.

It doesn't say that. You have to read the text of the bill rather than just the preamble which states this simpler version of the regulation, which is what Jeremy cited in that thread:

"This bill would clarify that an electric bicycle is a bicycle equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor that does not exceed 750 watts of power. "

You have to read further. Waaaaay down in Section 2. 312.5(a) restates the sentence from the preamble above.
An “electric bicycle” is a bicycle equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor that does not exceed 750 watts of power.

But then take the extra step of reading further, into 312.5(d) and especially 312.5(d)(2)). This section describes what is NOT an ebike.

(d) The following vehicles are not electric bicycles under this code and shall not be advertised, sold, offered for sale, or labeled as electric bicycles:

(1) A vehicle with two or three wheels powered by an electric motor that is intended by the manufacturer to be modifiable to attain a speed greater than 20 miles per hour on motor power alone or to attain more than 750 watts of power.​

(2) A vehicle that is modified to attain a speed greater than 20 miles per hour on motor power alone or to have motor power of more than 750 watts.​

The two statements are side by side, and subtly different. This was done expressly to shut down any room for interpretation. and set the 750w limit in stone. Any bike capable out of the box, or of being modified to exceed 20 mph OR reach more than 750w of output is no longer an ebike.

The Electrek article in Post #1 also noted this hard limit is reality, as well. So, like I said... the real thing to watch is how this gets enforced. Because if you read the regulation the consequences to hundreds of thousands of legally sold ebikes is profound.

Here's the final text of the bill:

Bill Text - SB-1271 Electric bicycles, powered mobility devices, and storage batteries.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

You have to read the text of the bill. And you specifically have to jump waaaay down into Section 2 and read 312.5 (d), rather than just the preamble which states this simpler version of the regulation, which is what Jeremy was citing

For the record, we looked at the whole bill as signed.

 

[m@Robertson]

From what I've seen over here in Cali, for enforcement, that police will pace you in their cruiser. If you go over 30mph, boom. If you go over 20 without pedaling, boom. So not much change.

As a California commuter, I have been paced many times by squad cars, and radar'd by stationary traffic cops as well. My typical cruising speed on my commuter was 30-34 mph, and I achieved that with a bike I geared myself with a big chainring and a small rear cluster. I've been paced at 34 for extended periods with no action taken, and I have been radar'd at about 36 going down an overpass and taking advantage of the speed bump you get from the downward slope.

In all cases, I was pedaling furiously, which is what it takes to get up to that speed ("pedaling furiously" is expressly illegal in the UK but this ain't the UK).

People misunderstand the class definitions when they interpret 28 mph as a speed limit. It is not (and you can read the law to confirm this). 28 mph is the assist limit. If you can pedal up and over that number, you can go that fast provided the speed limit on the street allows it, and you are going no faster than it is safe for conditions (so if you get dense tule fog like what is common in the CA Central Valley, and you are driving on a street with a 40 mph speed limit, maybe its only safe to go 15).

If I was throttling and getting paced, I bet I would have gotten pulled over. Plus I am wearing a downhill helmet with a chin guard, have front and rear daytime lights, both blinking and solid, and obey traffic signs and lights. I'm not the kind of rider the cops are looking for.

 

[m@Robertson]

For the record, we looked at the whole bill as signed.

I know what you said in the thread, but you missed 312.5(d)(1). You were looking only at the preamble, the opener to 312.5 and 312.5(d)(2). 312.5(d)(1) stands entirely on its own as an independent restriction, and is new to the vehicle code. It complements 312.5(d)(2) and between the both of them, imposes the hard 750w limit that can't be gotten around anymore.

 

[jabberwocky]

The Electrek article in Post #1 also noted this hard limit is reality, as well. So, like I said... the real thing to watch is how this gets enforced. Because if you read the regulation the consequences to hundreds of thousands of legally sold ebikes is profound.

The thing that sucks is that if ebikes had largely adhered to the assist and throttle limits already set out in the law, motor power would be largely a non-issue. But its just become another thing that the industry completely ignores. Sucks because IMO a bike that has 1500w peak but caps at 20mph is much more useful as a car replacement in semi-urban or urban areas because it gives you a lot more ability to carry a load. But like 0.1% of people buying high power bikes want them to help with load carrying, most just want to ride 30+mph on throttle all the time, and hide behind "its an ebike, you can't tell me I can't ride it on the bike path" when it causes problems.

I personally think the CA law is largely setup to go after manufacturers. We will see how it plays out, but I won't be surprised if CA starts going after companies that play fast and loose with assist limits and motor power and ship to CA.