Class 3 Bikes: What Do Manufacturers Know That We Don't Know?

[Dallant]

FWIW, just rode a multiple use trail the other day that had a 15 mph speed limit…on gravel…(on a long downhill section) in Montana!
First time I’ve ever seen a speed limit sign on a trail anywhere.

 

[Ken M]

i don’t quite understand the analogy? apologies.

cars going 50mph on the road is not the same as people with pets on a path walking 4-5mph, cyclists at 5-10, and ebikes at 10-30 in mixed traffic.

most of the local regulations aren’t really about the top speed of the bike as much as it’s about managing the total range of speeds among all path users. the closer all those mixed users are to each other the inherently safer it is.

in my community you can go as fast as the bike will allow if you want to use the road. but the path has limits because of shared use. and while the paths around me actually do have a lot of mixed users (it’s NOT a deserted path where i’d be the only rider for miles), even if it were relative deserted, because it’s a public benefiting asset it should still accommodate all types of uses if so designated.

life is full of compromises. in the grand scheme of things. my complaining about not being able to go as fast as possible on a shared path with walkers, joggers, pets, babies etc would make me feel kind of petty, and first-world-problemish.

road speeds on the road fixes the issue.

Everything you just wrote is supportive on path "use" speed limits not "product definition" assist limits at 20mph or 28mph. Everyone seems to think that if the assist is set at 20mph that is speed the rider is going 100% of the time as if they can't voluntarily go slower.

Setting path speed limits is what the states and local agencies should be regulating....not defining what is a compliant ebike when the federal definition and safety regulation has been in place for so long and it's a good regulation setting a LSEB as the equivalent of a bike.

 

[Ken M]

You are correct you missed my point... We need infrastructure repair/Replacement Revamp or whatever title or description works for you.. I think its needed also... but We have a bloated system that takes enough earned cash from You/ Me and the rest. I think we have enough waste and time for accountability. Throwing more money at the problem (which the money never makes it to where the problem is,, Remember those shovel ready jobs?) ...

I could care less if you drive 5mph or 120mph ... But when you get caught breaking the law you pay to play and so on.
Murder Boxes? Lol 19,000 people die taking showers every year... No wonder french dont wash up (sarc)...Toss the tubs?
Think we agree on a the basics but not on how we get their from here.... If you get out of the city you will find a new world and a lot of roads and less traffic and lessClimate Change as you call it. Well then you add in the cow farts and I guess we are back to climate change...I agree some climates change with infrastructure with more concrete and Asphalt..

I think everyone in this age feels their opinion matters to everyone... It doesnt. Everyone feels they need to have some control over the next (HOA). Used to be a day when some things were settled the old fashioned way and they let there hands talk to each others Noses...

Seems the older i get I hear everyone crying of one thing or another like everyone should hear them or listen..Everyone has a complaint anymore and less respect.

I live outside the city sort of.. No sidewalks or street lights... I can walk run or ride down the street at anytime. I cart my grand daughter to the store or down the road and she enjoys it.... I have a major intersection 3 blocks down I avoid and when I cross it I wait for a good clearing to do it safely. We ride down to the shopping center where they have dinner and shopping.. Let the little one play in the little park or get wet as they have a water sprinkler feature..

I dont like people who think they need to rule or voice opinions and make rules because they feel people are to stupid to rule themselves ... Warning labels are for the kids some of us raised.... Phones and social media has just put people in a bad place in common decency ..

Life is short and we are going to argue about how fast an ebike goes? Or what sticker it has? Or you or anyone else wants to ride on the side of the road with a big car and not get hit? Take the side streets.. There are safer ways of doing things... and avenues of going around obstacles .... Use common sense.. I ride against traffic so I can see the cars coming.. Been hit.. Not fun..

When your life is over... Complain to whoever you see then about why they didnt come out with a class 3.5 ebike with an air ride suspension..

And remember Stupid hurts... so if you are hurt, well then...


Next thing you know... They will put signs up and you wont be able to go fast than the posted speeds.. Oh wait.

You do what is right and you would be amazed at who would follow... If people act like jerks? More people jump in and act like jerks... Just saying.

I guess implying that those that believe the humans are impacting the climate are just plain wrong on an internet forum is not the same as social media you feel has put people in a bad place. I'm not wanting to pick fights on this or any forum but it's pretty overwhelmingly clear that the state 3-class legislation is far worse than the what was in place before it. While there were some states still considering ebikes as motor vehicles that would not have stood up in any courtroom after HR727 was congressionally passed. Some say that is crazy but the state view that they are motor vehicles came from the NHTSA regulation that HR727 replaced.

The states just needed to keep the bike use laws they had in place for decades and everything would be going pretty smoothly. If some trails and paths do need slow speeds for safety then just have a speed limit and riders that violate it would have to face the consequences if caught speeding as with automobiles.

 

[Ken M]

FWIW, just rode a multiple use trail the other day that had a 15 mph speed limit…on gravel…(on a long downhill section) in Montana!
First time I’ve ever seen a speed limit sign on a trail anywhere.

The speed limit of 15mph makes a lot more sense than an ebike assist limit set at 15mph like Europe has. Funny that some on this forum think the assist limit for an ebike should be 15mph (essentially making them far less useful for urban mobility when we need more people out of cars).

 

[AHicks]

Regarding infrastructure as it applies to bikes, painting a line on the side of a busy road is NOT infrastructure. It's wishful thinking, or some fat cat wanting credit for the forward thinking required for "creating" a bike lane. Nothing is said about the people killed trying to use something like that. I think there should be accountability beyond the normal "oops!".

As far as government spending, that's a different topic.

 

[AHicks]

PA is actually pretty good for emtb access, since so much trail is under state control and the state allows class 1s now. Been meaning to get my emtb to Raystown or Michaux, both place I've ridden many times on my normal mtb over the years.
The problem is that the goal isn't to expand access no matter what, its to expand access without disturbing existing user groups. I often think that ebikers think they exist in a vacuum, but almost everything we want access to was built with non-powered use in mind and has numerous, large existing user groups who already use it (be they cyclists, hikers, walkers, equestrians, etc). Often members of those user groups are the ones who lobbied for and successfully got said trail built in the first place. They tend to have influence well beyond what we have. Many of those groups have a very hostile view of powered bikes, and especially hostile views of powered bikes that operate throttle only.

On the bold, I don't agree at all. If we want see e-bikes flourish, we need to encourage, not restrict. Safe bet these "existing user groups" are soliciting for more members any chance they get, and trying to expand their objectives, which I would imagine, include more trails for their use. The problem is, that drawbridge mentality, where they're "in" so they pull the drawbridge up to avoid anyone else getting in or crowding them, nearly always fails when pushed. There is no logic to support it and it it's counter productive in the grand scheme of things.

Maybe wishful thinking on my part, but I can't help but believe that it wouldn't be hard to convince legislatures that a user group, that would include those who might benefit from the use of class 2 bikes (seniors represent a very large percentage of voters), should have the same rights to any trail the class 1 bikes (or any bicycle for that matter) have access to. To deny them that, for ANY reason, is an injustice.

It shouldn't be difficult to get the bike shops behind any movement like that, as they stand to benefit tremendously for obvious reasons.

I think it may be time to purposely "rock the boat". Poke that bees nest. ANY conversation based on logic should show how counter productive restricting the use of class 2 bikes actually is.

 

[Ken M]

On the bold, I don't agree at all. If we want see e-bikes flourish, we need to encourage, not restrict. Safe bet these "existing user groups" are soliciting for more members any chance they get, and trying to expand their objectives, which I would imagine, include more trails for their use. The problem is, that drawbridge mentality, where they're "in" so they pull the drawbridge up to avoid anyone else getting in or crowding them, nearly always fails when pushed. There is no logic to support it and it it's counter productive in the grand scheme of things.

Maybe wishful thinking on my part, but I can't help but believe that it wouldn't be hard to convince legislatures that a user group, that would include those who might benefit from the use of class 2 bikes (seniors represent a very large percentage of voters), should have the same rights to any trail the class 1 bikes (or any bicycle for that matter) have access to. To deny them that, for ANY reason, is an injustice.

It shouldn't be difficult to get the bike shops behind any movement like that, as they stand to benefit tremendously for obvious reasons.

I think it may be time to purposely "rock the boat". Poke that bees nest. ANY conversation based on logic should show how counter productive restricting the use of class 2 bikes actually is.

The fact that a Class 2 was even created shows no one was thinking when drafting the policy at People for Bikes or approving the state legislation. A great example of a brain fart if there ever was one. Europe banned throttle-assist ebikes (for no reason other than some thinking that makes an ebike the same as a motorcycle) so People for Bikes felt compelled keep them a different Class in the US because banning them was not going to be possible because the federal LSEB definition had allowed them since 2002. Then Class 3 was defined just 8mph faster to harmonize with the EU S-pedelec definition (there in lies the problem - the states should have done anything to define what an ebike was they should have just focused on "use" regulation and we wouldn't have such a mess with local/city/state regulations).

 

[J.R.]

On the bold, I don't agree at all. If we want see e-bikes flourish, we need to encourage, not restrict. Safe bet these "existing user groups" are soliciting for more members any chance they get, and trying to expand their objectives, which I would imagine, include more trails for their use. The problem is, that drawbridge mentality, where they're "in" so they pull the drawbridge up to avoid anyone else getting in or crowding them, nearly always fails when pushed. There is no logic to support it and it it's counter productive in the grand scheme of things.

Maybe wishful thinking on my part, but I can't help but believe that it wouldn't be hard to convince legislatures that a user group, that would include those who might benefit from the use of class 2 bikes (seniors represent a very large percentage of voters), should have the same rights to any trail the class 1 bikes (or any bicycle for that matter) have access to. To deny them that, for ANY reason, is an injustice.

It shouldn't be difficult to get the bike shops behind any movement like that, as they stand to benefit tremendously for obvious reasons.

I think it may be time to purposely "rock the boat". Poke that bees nest. ANY conversation based on logic should show how counter productive restricting the use of class 2 bikes actually is.

We have one regional LBS that is involved and does support the class 2 everywhere class 1 is allowed. Unfortunately most bike shops aren't on board with throttles. Some independent shops sell Trek, some Giant and all the corporate stores selling Specialized, Trek, Giant are selling class 1 and 3. Dicks Sporting Goods isn't interested in this kind of politics.

In 2020 the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources had class 2 on the agenda to consider. Considering their willingness to accept class 1, this was an encouraging sign. All meetings had to go virtual due to the pandemic and when they tried to have public meetings to discuss rules and regulations it didn't work. The issue was tabled, along with many other issues that constitutionally require input and public comment periods in our state. Things aren't getting done during this pandemic.

If ebikes are legal in your state then these access issues don't require going to the legislature. It would be nice if it was codified in law, but it doesn't have to be. Laws can take years and are difficult to get statewide support for a marginal issue.

I was surprised it wasn't a bees nest anywhere I went. Most of these people genuinely care about the people and the public spaces they regulate. Many of them knew little about ebikes and just needed to be educated. Letter writing won't get it done. It takes a commitment of time. Glad-handing and show-n-tell.

It may not seem fast to us, the faithful, but access and adoption has actually been very fast for ebikes. MTB, ATV, Motocross, snow mobiles spent decades fighting for access, without much to show for it. Ebikes have gained so much access in the last 5 years. Most places across the country had complete bans on paths and trails just 6 to 10 years ago. We now have millions more riders than we did then and a lot more access. We're getting there.

 

[AHicks]

We have one regional LBS that is involved and does support the class 2 everywhere class 1 is allowed. Unfortunately most bike shops aren't on board with throttles. Some independent shops sell Trek, some Giant and all the corporate stores selling Specialized, Trek, Giant are selling class 1 and 3. Dicks Sporting Goods isn't interested in this kind of politics.

In 2020 the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources had class 2 on the agenda to consider. Considering their willingness to accept class 1, this was an encouraging sign. All meetings had to go virtual due to the pandemic and when they tried to have public meetings to discuss rules and regulations it didn't work. The issue was tabled, along with many other issues that constitutionally require input and public comment periods in our state. Things aren't getting done during this pandemic.

If ebikes are legal in your state then these access issues don't require going to the legislature. It would be nice if it was codified in law, but it doesn't have to be. Laws can take years and are difficult to get statewide support for a marginal issue.

I was surprised it wasn't a bees nest anywhere I went. Most of these people genuinely care about the people and the public spaces they regulate. Many of them knew little about ebikes and just needed to be educated. Letter writing won't get it done. It takes a commitment of time. Glad-handing and show-n-tell.

It may not seem fast to us, the faithful, but access and adoption has actually been very fast for ebikes. MTB, ATV, Motocross, snow mobiles spent decades fighting for access, without much to show for it. Ebikes have gained so much access in the last 5 years. Most places across the country had complete bans on paths and trails just 6 to 10 years ago. We now have millions more riders than we did then and a lot more access. We're getting there.

My issue may be that I'm from much more progressive states - Michigan and Florida. For instance Michigan now allows non registered ATV's on many roads in the northern lower, and all of the UP (just bring your money!). It has thousands and thousands of miles available for snowmobiles during their season (these guys spend WAY more than the oft catered to golfers ever thought of spending). Many of these trails are available to anyone that wants to use them the rest of the year. Already stated is Florida's mind set - just bring your bike on down. We just don't care what it looks like.....

I struggle when hearing about how restrictive PA is. There's little reason for it. More political BS.... -Al

 

[jabberwocky]

It may not seem fast to us, the faithful, but access and adoption has actually been very fast for ebikes. MTB, ATV, Motocross, snow mobiles spent decades fighting for access, without much to show for it. Ebikes have gained so much access in the last 5 years. Most places across the country had complete bans on paths and trails just 6 to 10 years ago. We now have millions more riders than we did then and a lot more access. We're getting there.

Uh, yeah. I know people who spent nearly 20 years pushing to build a single trail (or open access to an existing one). Ebikers do need to understand that we've had it really good in how rapidly we have gained access and to how much. It isn't perfect, but its gone (and continues to go) really well.

On the bold, I don't agree at all. If we want see e-bikes flourish, we need to encourage, not restrict. Safe bet these "existing user groups" are soliciting for more members any chance they get, and trying to expand their objectives, which I would imagine, include more trails for their use. The problem is, that drawbridge mentality, where they're "in" so they pull the drawbridge up to avoid anyone else getting in or crowding them, nearly always fails when pushed. There is no logic to support it and it it's counter productive in the grand scheme of things.

Sure, all groups are open to more members, and all groups work to get and maintain trails. I disagree with your assertion that there is a widespread "drawbridge mentality". IME you have the most success with advocacy when you build relationships with those existing groups. Their concerns (that these trails were built with non powered use in mind and we would like to bring powered vehicles onto them) are not irrational. Most of them have zero experience with ebikes. If you come in and demand access and try to force it, it isn't going to go well. As I said, a lot of trails were built and are maintained by those groups. Probably 80% of the mtb trails I ride were advocated for, built by and are maintained by the local IMBA affiliate. They do several thousand man-hours of trailbuilding and maintenance per year and have for decades now, and they have tremendous trailbuilding knowledge. That gives them clout. Meeting up with leadership members of that org (I'm friends with a few of them) and letting them ride my ebike is worth more than ten letters to the CPwhatever or a million words typed onto a forum.

As JR has said a few times, land managers are not the enemy. They generally are really passionate about the trails they manage and want to see them being used by the widest range of people possible. Their concerns about ebikes are legitimate. Doesn't mean I think ebikes shouldn't be allowed access, I obviously do. But the process isn't to try a top down forcing of the issue, its to do it the way everyone else does. Build the relationship and demonstrate that we can be good trail users and stewards.

 

[Gmanx]

my point @rawlus is, when ebikes start putting up the body counts automobiles do as it relates to pedestrians, maybe all this hand ringing / pearl clutching is warranted. Otherwise, what are you really arguing over? Because you don't like people going fast? Guess what? They go 60-80 MPH in murder boxes that actually kill people, go get upset about that. Put laws in place to control how you can drive automobiles similarly to what is proposed for ebikes, it would never fly lol

@DavidRvR - yes, you're the old man yelling at a cloud.

 

[Ken M]

We have one regional LBS that is involved and does support the class 2 everywhere class 1 is allowed. Unfortunately most bike shops aren't on board with throttles. Some independent shops sell Trek, some Giant and all the corporate stores selling Specialized, Trek, Giant are selling class 1 and 3. Dicks Sporting Goods isn't interested in this kind of politics.

In 2020 the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources had class 2 on the agenda to consider. Considering their willingness to accept class 1, this was an encouraging sign. All meetings had to go virtual due to the pandemic and when they tried to have public meetings to discuss rules and regulations it didn't work. The issue was tabled, along with many other issues that constitutionally require input and public comment periods in our state. Things aren't getting done during this pandemic.

If ebikes are legal in your state then these access issues don't require going to the legislature. It would be nice if it was codified in law, but it doesn't have to be. Laws can take years and are difficult to get statewide support for a marginal issue.

I was surprised it wasn't a bees nest anywhere I went. Most of these people genuinely care about the people and the public spaces they regulate. Many of them knew little about ebikes and just needed to be educated. Letter writing won't get it done. It takes a commitment of time. Glad-handing and show-n-tell.

It may not seem fast to us, the faithful, but access and adoption has actually been very fast for ebikes. MTB, ATV, Motocross, snow mobiles spent decades fighting for access, without much to show for it. Ebikes have gained so much access in the last 5 years. Most places across the country had complete bans on paths and trails just 6 to 10 years ago. We now have millions more riders than we did then and a lot more access. We're getting there.

Most places did NOT have legit bans on paths and trails just 6 to 10 years ago. That is a perception based on policy remnants of ebikes being considered as "motorized vehicles" prior to the handoff from the NHTSA (which considered them motorized vehicles) to the CPSC via HR727 (which redefined a compliant "low speed electric bicycle' as a bike). One of the best examples of the "motorized vehicle" mindset claiming to ban ebikes was NY City where they addressed the issue with non-compliant LSEBs by implying a ban on all ebikes (even People for Bikes says NY City never really banned compliant LSEBs).

I have seen the comments made by some local decision makers in Colorado saying they can't understand how a bike with a motor can be considered something other than a "motorized vehicle." They can't let go of the old way of thinking and it's one of the reasons why People for Bikes felt is was OK to parse ebike classes based on motor performance when the states were supposed to focus on "use" regulations. How many local land managers view Class 2 throttle-assist ebikes as the same a throttle motorcycle? Probably most.

I'm going to repeat this sentence as it does help everyone understand the difference between a "use" regulation and a "product definition":
Having a speed limit of 15mph on a trail/path is a "use" regulation ... Having an assist limit of 15mph on an ebike is a "product definition" regulation.

States have the right to regulate "use"....feds have the constitutional enumerated right to regulate product "definitions" & safety compliance via interstate commerce harmonization. I know I'm a broken record on this but it sure seems that Class system is getting attacked more and more as bad state/local legislation and the root reason is because it was not about "use" regulation. Just because People for Bikes and many others claim that the Class system is "use"-based regulation it is NOT.

 

[Gmanx]

Regarding infrastructure as it applies to bikes, painting a line on the side of a busy road is NOT infrastructure. It's wishful thinking, or some fat cat wanting credit for the forward thinking required for "creating" a bike lane. Nothing is said about the people killed trying to use something like that. I think there should be accountability beyond the normal "oops!".

As far as government spending, that's a different topic.

How else is the bike infrastructure going to get built and maintained if not involving governments spending mending? People act like its a mystery how all these roads for automobiles pop up and are maintained, somehow that same policy could not and should not be applied to personal mobility infrastructure?

 

[J.R.]

My issue may be that I'm from much more progressive states - Michigan and Florida. For instance Michigan now allows non registered ATV's on many roads in the northern lower, and all of the UP (just bring your money!). It has thousands and thousands of miles available for snowmobiles during their season (these guys spend WAY more than the oft catered to golfers ever thought of spending). Many of these trails are available to anyone that wants to use them the rest of the year. Already stated is Florida's mind set - just bring your bike on down. We just don't care what it looks like.....

I struggle when hearing about how restrictive PA is.... -Al

All you mentioned is here in PA. PA is the 9th most rural state? Something like that. More open miles and land than any state. Maybe pro throttle devotes need to be more involved. I share my ebike experience at every volunteer work day I've attended. Education is the answer. People will listen.

 

[Gmanx]

even the worse ebikes out there right now, and there are some clunker/hacks/crap that is out there that should, would have to have MAJOR body counts to even do the damage of automobiles, so lets keep things in perspective. Anything ebike is always better than automobile, its quantifiable!

 

[AHicks]

All you mentioned is here in PA. PA is the 9th most rural state? Something like that. More open miles and land than any state. Maybe pro throttle devotes need to be more involved. I share my ebike experience at every volunteer work day I've attended. Education is the answer. People will listen.

Clearly not the case, and even if so, need to question the relevance. The way bigger point is lack of access to class 2.

 

[J.R.]

Clearly not the case, and even if so, need to question the relevance. The way bigger point is lack of access to class 2.

The entire state is open. More miles of trails and acres of state land than any other state. Very clear.

 

[DavidRvR]

How else is the bike infrastructure going to get built and maintained if not involving governments spending mending? People act like its a mystery how all these roads for automobiles pop up and are maintained, somehow that same policy could not and should not be applied to personal mobility infrastructure?

Believe it or not .. I live in Las Vegas and every new Community that gets built (master community).. Has to put in a park and Joggers path/Bike path.. Local Communities take care of it.. We are expanding and houses for sale.. Its a little hot in the summer but its a DRY HEAT!!! haaaaa... Anyways.. Each builder has to improve those areas and the HOA takes care of it after that... Didnt take Trump or Biden to get involved...

Some places are Not growing or are old communities but City improvements come to mind.

 

[AHicks]

The entire state is open. More miles of trails and acres of state land than any other state. Very clear.

A quick google search shows not even close.....​

Public Lands - DNR - State of Michigan​

https://www.michigan.gov › dnr

Forests, parks, trails, hunting land and more. The DNR takes care of approximately 4.6 million acres of public lands owned by Michigan residents.

PENNSYLVANIA STATE PARKS AND FORESTS​

300,000 acres

Pennsylvania has one of the nation's largest state park systems, with 121 state parks encompassing nearly 300,000 acres.

​

 

[J.R.]

A quick google search shows not even close.....​

Public Lands - DNR - State of Michigan​

https://www.michigan.gov › dnr

Forests, parks, trails, hunting land and more. The DNR takes care of approximately 4.6 million acres of public lands owned by Michigan residents.

PENNSYLVANIA STATE PARKS AND FORESTS​

300,000 acres

Pennsylvania has one of the nation's largest state park systems, with 121 state parks encompassing nearly 300,000 acres.

​

A quick Google search....

There are state parks, state game lands and state forests.

I didn't mention your state. As for not even close, I didn't compare size of land, I compare trails, paths, fire roads in acreage of land. A 1000 acre forest without a trail to ride doesn't help.