E bike legality question.

[AHicks]

Right, let them text while riding a bike!

 

[rich c]

The lawmakers would be better serving their constituents by regulating the Idiots driving high powered cars, while eating their fast food, drinking coffee, texting, talking on the cell etc. that kill multiple thousands a month than worrying about a few too fast bicycles!
Never could figure out how a bar, could legally have a parking lot?? thought it was illegal to drink and drive! They put a governor on a bike so it won't exceed 20 mph and allow a car to go up to 120 mph when the highest speed limit in the US is 85?
It's all BS and all about the regulations that can produce revenue.

My wife has been rear ended in her car, twice in 16 months. Both times she was sitting at a red light. First time a car behind her took the major hit, second time she was last in line. Both were texting, second time texting and no insurance. Cost us $500 deductible for sitting in a line of cars at a red light. Almost totaled the car the second time, $4,700 damage. Distracted drivers keep me from riding streets as much as possible!

 

[PDoz]

It makes sense to me that younger people, seeking mobility, and perhaps not being able to afford a car, would be drawn to personal electric vehicles that can get them from place-to-place efficiency. While I love e-bikes, they aren't suited for all transportation purposes.

There should be greater openness to a variety of personal electric vehicles, and I hope that over time infrastructure develops to support a variety of non-car options that use less energy, take less road-space, and are more affordable.

Early adopters of newtech - if only we could get past calling these mobility devices ebikes / mopeds/ mobility scooters etc , and just accept them as something new and exciting. Leave ebike legislation along and let the pen pushers play with a whole new set of rules for erides?

 

[PDoz]

I heard texting while driving is more dangerous than drinking and driving.

In Canada, they're considering making texting while driving a crime.
https://globalnews.ca/news/2903526/...l-offence-quebec-urges-ottawa-to-consider-it/

Are you saying it isn't already a crime?

In australia, even TALKING on a mobile whilst driving is illegal ( hands free is tollerated) . Doesn't stop people doing it - cars need mobile phone blockers

 

[ebikemom]

Anything involving holding the phone while driving is a crime where I live. But, folks can do a lot with their phones without touching them, and that is still extremely distracting. It's a problem, for sure!

 

[6zfshdb]

This is something of a coincidence related to this thread so I thought I would share. I'll also post it in the "Ebike Laws, Regulations" category.

I rode a trail on Federal land in Pennsylvania yesterday and saw a sign I have never seen before. It was posted at every trailhead sometime this season.



The picture next to "No Motorized Bikes" looks more like a gas powered dirt bike than a bicycle. Somewhat encouraged, I rode the trail anyway. I encountered a park ranger during my ride and struck up a brief conversation. He looked at the bike but made no comment. I certainly didn't tell him it was an ebike. It's fairly stealthy though, especially with the panniers, so I don't know if he recognized or considered it a motorized bike.



I ride this trail a couple of times each season and, due to the questionable nature of the sign, will continue to do so until told otherwise.

 

[Mr. Coffee]

I'd like to add some perspective to this thread...

From a historical standpoint, "trails" on American public land came about through three different processes:

1. Historical trails. These were existing wagon roads, mining trails, and livestock driveways that have been adapted as "trails" in the modern era.
2. Fire access trails. Most of these were built in a huge burst of activity in the 1930s through the CCC. One interesting point about them is that the men (and they were all men) who laid them out were all working from the same plan.
3. Recreational trails. Most of these were built post WWII, since before then the idea of going hiking in the woods for fun was somewhat odd and only a few eccentrics and high rollers actually participated in such activities. Also during this time some trails were built for motorbikes and OHVs.

The important thing to note is that only a tiny minority of these trails were ever built with bicycles in mind, and the vast majority of those trails, for reason of tread width, sight lines, and vertical and horizontal clearances are at best marginally safe and at worst insanely unsafe for cyclists or to be shared with cyclists and other trail users.

Since a high-water point in the 1970's, there has been a long and inexorable decline in the number of trails and miles of trail available. This during a time period when the population in the United States very nearly doubled. As a point of reference, where I live on the East slope of the Cascades, eighty to ninety percent of the trails that existed during the 1970's have simply ceased to exist.

It gets complicated because different land management agencies have dealt with the benign neglect in different ways. The Park Service has gotten creative and managed to keep most of their trails open. A lot of that is because, as I pointed out in a different thread, each Park has a lot of flexibility in how they accomplish their mission (one book I read described each Park as an independent fiefdom, and that description is not far off) and that let them get creative. The US Forest Service and the BLM, on the other hand, gave much less flexibility to local administrators and also had other missions and priorities. The net effect is that the vast majority of trails (probably on the order of ninety percent) administered by these agencies have ceased to exist.

Now take that perspective to a hypothetical hiker or horseman who lives in the Seattle area. The number of trails accessible to her has substantially decreased, by 75 percent or more, in the last few decades. Now they are being told that they have to share what is left of those trails with a new class of trail users. On trails that were never designed for those kinds of users in the first place.

 

[AHicks]

My experience regarding "trail loss" has been somewhat different. In Michigan, and in Florida (areas I'm familiar with), multi use trails are growing. Actually, not just growing, but growing big time! To give you an idea, they just completed a 5 MILLION dollar bridge to carry bikers and hikers over 1 expressway in a Detroit suburb. That's 5 million with no trail on either side of it. Local communities, through much begging and pleading on the part of various user groups, have decided to step up and financially support the conversion of an abandoned railroad right of way on both sides of it.

That's one project, and these are both very progressive states actively pursuing too many trail projects to count easily.

MANY parts of Florida are very actively recruiting out of town dollars by spending big money developing absolutely stunning trail systems, both the long distance rails to trails projects, and inter connected routs to and from those longer trails.

When it comes to e-bikes, and their use on these trails, for those of us that are riding recreationaly, I maintain we need to maintain our Sunday best while being e-bike ambassadors to those with little or no exposure to them. If we can be seen often enough, without creating a lot of waves, I don't think we'll have any issues mixing with other traffic of all type.

One argument that's not used much in their favor, is the fact e-bikes allow access to these recreational trails for many people who would otherwise be unable to use the trails (for any one of hundreds of different reasons). THAT is very likely the argument that has the best chance of swaying an otherwise "easier to say no" opinion...... -Al

 

[Ken M]

My understanding for CA is 750 watt motor. Once I learned this I gave up desiring the Juiced Hyperfat due to its 1000 watt motor.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1096

The wattage rating of a motor is nebulous. Without test conditions and specifying the control electronics a static rating means nothing. The reason why this happened is because law makers don't like to have anyone with a technical degree helping write laws because then they would make sense. I literally had a conversation about this problem with one of the Colorado lawmakers that helped push the Class 3 ebike legislation here in Colorado. Sadly People for Bikes has been advocating this meritless legislation as THE MODEL legislation that should be adopted by all states (apparently there are no technical people at People for Bikes either).

 

[AHicks]

Agree Ken. I'd like to see a spot check on the 1500w DD rear hub motor on my bike proving anything but what I said it was.....

Let them regulate max wattage numbers. Completely unenforceable. It'll keep them from doing something that might actually affect us, that has some actual thought behind it.

 

[baxterblack]

That is an E-moped, It should never be on a shared bike trail.

 

[AHicks]

That is an E-moped, It should never be on a shared bike trail.

It is NOT an E-moped by any stretch of the imagination. I'll line it up with 6-10 other Rad City bikes and we'll see how long it takes you to pick it out. It's set to 20mph max and ridden in a very sane (class 2) manner. It DOES allow me to cross a busy street pretty quickly..... something I was not happy about with the standard power (might help to know I'm well over 300 lbs).

You need to ride a few more bikes, it sounds like, if you would call a bike like this an "E-moped". The 1500w DD rear hub will actually have about the same, or maybe even a little less, get up and go from a standing start than a 750w rear hub gear drive (standard on the Rad Rover, which is also rated class 2). The fact it's quite a bit faster if allowed to go as fast as it's capable on top speed is a moot point if governed to 20mph.....

 

[Stromer2work]

It is NOT an E-moped by any stretch of the imagination.

sorry my opinion differs. e-moped. Watch the release video. He's riding it around town as a scooter.

 

[rich c]

sorry my opinion differs. e-moped. Watch the release video. He's riding it around town as a scooter.

I agree, I can’t imagine pedaling 30-40 miles with the pedals in that position and no adjustment in the seat.

 

[AHicks]

sorry my opinion differs. e-moped. Watch the release video. He's riding it around town as a scooter.

Re: the e-moped, I think there's some confusion here. Or maybe it's just me. I was speaking about my Rad City, which looks nothing like the pic ?

 

[6zfshdb]

When was that sign made? If it was made years ago when ebikes weren't nearly as popular as today, whoever made the sign probably meant dirt bikes. (as you can see in the picture)

It doesn't look like a pedal assist bike in the picture...

The sign is fairly new and was posted sometime since I last rode the trail in June, 2018.

Yes, the picture looks more like a dirt bike than a pedal assist ebike. That's why I rode the trail anyway. I don't normally ignore posted regulations but this appears to be a gray area. As I said in my original post, the ranger I encountered wasn't upset by my presence.

 

[Bruce Arnold]

You

I agree, I can’t imagine pedaling 30-40 miles with the pedals in that position and no adjustment in the seat.

You could watch the video in which Tora Harris does exactly that.

I couldn't do it, but it can be done.

 

[Ken M]

In my opinion if you have a emoped (ie no functional pedals) with limited power (not necessarily under 750W as that is a nebulous legal limit that is not enforceable because its tied only to the motor) that has the top speed governed to less than 20mph (at least have a swith to put it in that mode if you are stopped going a bit faster) then this is still an ebike in every state with the 3 class system. Think about this - if you chain breaks on a DD hub motor ebike with a throttle you can still ride it home and I would say that is legal. There is a Class 2 ebike called the Footloose that does not have functional pedals (there are pedals but they only rotate a generator to recharge the battery) that is sold legally in the US. There are many last mile ebike sold in the US without functional pedals to there is a lot of legal precedent to an emoped that is limited to 20mph as being considered an ebike.

The Scrambler is clearly a product that falls into a grey area. It can go faster than 20mph with throttle alone. But Tora is typically pretty smart about this and it's probably in off-road mode only that it does this so the owner can ride it legally as a class 2 ebike (just keep that finger ready to switch it back to class 2 if you throttle faster).

I'm sure that I'll get a lot of "opinions" on this but hopefully those people will support any counter argument with reference to actual regulations.

 

[Bruce Arnold]

So you already tried to ride 30-40 miles on the Scrambler??

No. I couldn't do it. Not that I didn't, I couldn't. As in not able to.

 

[rich c]

In my opinion if you have a emoped (ie no functional pedals) with limited power (not necessarily under 750W as that is a nebulous legal limit that is not enforceable because its tied only to the motor) that has the top speed governed to less than 20mph (at least have a swith to put it in that mode if you are stopped going a bit faster) then this is still an ebike in every state with the 3 class system. Think about this - if you chain breaks on a DD hub motor ebike with a throttle you can still ride it home and I would say that is legal. There is a Class 2 ebike called the Footloose that does not have functional pedals (there are pedals but they only rotate a generator to recharge the battery) that is sold legally in the US. There are many last mile ebike sold in the US without functional pedals to there is a lot of legal precedent to an emoped that is limited to 20mph as being considered an ebike.

The Scrambler is clearly a product that falls into a grey area. It can go faster than 20mph with throttle alone. But Tora is typically pretty smart about this and it's probably in off-road mode only that it does this so the owner can ride it legally as a class 2 ebike (just keep that finger ready to switch it back to class 2 if you throttle faster).

I'm sure that I'll get a lot of "opinions" on this but hopefully those people will support any counter argument with reference to actual regulations.

I just can't agree with that "I need a throttle to get home in case my chain breaks". How many broken chains have you had? I've had zero. Not sure the conservation officer would agree with that as a legal interpretation.