It’s 2025 what does your ebike look like?

[Ken M]

Maybe for road bikes. But for mountain bikes, lighter is better, because it's easier to control a lighter bike on rough, steep terrain, and if you need to hike-a-bike (see my avatar image!) it's much easier to carry a lighter bike over obstacles.

I also expect my 2025 bike to be indistinguishable from a non-electric bike at a casual glance; to have a belt drive (well, my 2019 e-bike does); and to have automatic assist levels as well as being able to control assist manually.

Why is there this obsession that an ebike look like a tradition bike? Why can't an ebike highlight the drive system like most motorcycles do. I think a lot of biker's have their Spandex too tight.

 

[Ken M]

I think we had this sort of debate on this forum before, but when people hear "28mph Class 3" they assume that people will try to ride at max speed all the time.
When we say Class 3 can be very useful, others say it's outright dangerous because 28mph is way too fast on bike trail.

We're talking about case by case scenario, obviously you won't be going as fast as possible all the time, but in some cases, the extra top speed of Class 3 can be very useful.

For example, you wouldn't be going 28mph in these situations:

However, you can go faster in these situations:

For some reason people just lack the ability to think rationally about assist speed. It's like they believe everyone that owns a sports car is flying past other cars and making everyone less safe.

All bikers should be aware that a human on a bike was able to average over 33mph for an hour. It was not considered a dangerous speed as spectators watched him from the stands and routed for him to set the record.

The assist speed does not limit the top speed of an ebike so this is a great question to ask the mamby pambies that think 32kph/20mph should be the the legal limit of the assist system:

If actual speed limits can’t be argued as the basis for the assist limit, what is it’s basis?

 

[Handlebars]

For some reason people just lack the ability to think rationally about assist speed. It's like they believe everyone that owns a sports car is flying past other cars and making everyone less safe.

All bikers should be aware that a human on a bike was able to average over 33mph for an hour. It was not considered a dangerous speed as spectators watched him from the stands and routed for him to set the record.

The assist speed does not limit the top speed of an ebike so this is a great question to ask the mamby pambies that think 32kph/20mph should be the the legal limit of the assist system:

If actual speed limits can’t be argued as the basis for the assist limit, what is it’s basis?

"

If actual speed limits can’t be argued as the basis for the assist limit, what is it’s basis?

Speed limits aren't the basis, obviously. Low enough speeds to be comparable to unassisted riding at it's best seems to be the basis.

 

[steve mercier]

My bike will have a force field and a dongle that disengages car motors within a prescribed radius... oh and a seat warmer.

 

[Cyklefanatic]

Very unlikely.

Electric motorcycles are very expensive. They're nice though.

Thanks to Elon by 2025 they will be cheaper, go further and last longer. We all owe him for his obsession.

 

[Al P]

If you an ebike is meant to be a commuter model / car supplement why would you be putting it on a car rack? That would be like putting a motorcycle on your car rack.

Our bikes are used strictly for exercise and fun. We sometimes take trail rides that are 5-15 miles from home. The roads to get to them are not safe enough to ride on. I have to mount and dismount two fairly heavy bikes twice for each trip.

 

[steve mercier]

Get proactive and email your local government to lobby for more infrastructure

 

[Handlebars]

I don't think there is any single logic that can explain ebike speed limit.

I think you're right about that, in that not every angle of what is given can be covered by any single "logic bit". It's a mishmash, poorly thought out and lacking in information.

I can point to the mishmash in what I already quoted showing that they don't understand the terminology they are attempting to use in support of their rules. They say that motorized bikes come in 2 kinds; some that look like bicycles and are therefore pedelecs, and that pedelecs REQUIRE pedaling, and that anything powered up with throttle only, is an e-scooter.
AND that pedelecs can go anywhere bicycles can- something else which is refuted by the law.

... City of Toronto's Municipal code recognizes two categories of e-bikes; pedelecs which are similar to bicycles, and e-scooters which are similar to gas scooters.

Pedelecs requires propulsion and are defined as a bicycle and can be used anywhere bicycles are permitted. E-Scooters can be driven solely by motor power and these are not allowed on multi-use trails or cycle tracks.

Pedelecs
E-bikes which are similar to bicycles are considered to be bicycles by the municipality of Toronto and may be used on all types of cycling infrastructure:

• painted bike lanes
• cycle tracks (separated bicycle lanes)
• multi-use trails

By definition in the Toronto Municipal Code, a 'pedelec' must weigh less than 40 kg and requires pedaling for propulsion.

But all that aside, there is no need to say that only a single viewpoint must explain everything in the mashup. The driving idea, I believe, is to limit ebikes to NO MORE THAN what an able rider can do

What's the point of governing the power to 500W or whatever, instead of top speed?

Since they do BOTH, it's a moot point.

For example, many ebikes will be barely moving if you try to climb up a steep hill. Cars will still pass you by at 30mph up hill.
Is it really that safe to climb hill at 5mph to 10mph when cars are passing by at 30mph?

How is riding your ebike uphill at 20mph more dangerous than going 20mph downhill?

Also, if ebikes can go above average person speed = dangerous?
Because I know many people found that ebikes' capability of fast acceleration to get out of dangerous situation (eg. busy intersection, overtaking other cyclists on trail, etc) very useful.

Ken M had a good point, those spandex warriors on roadbikes can go 30+mph on flat roads. Why is ebikes going 20mph, 28mph, all the sudden a big threat?

The big threat should be obvious: 120mph capable ebikes on the horizon. On the sidewalk. That is a serious and realistic threat. So they in the dumbness try to put in reasonable controls and it's really working out fantastic so far. They haven't outlawed us yet or put onerous insurance and certification on the table.

 

[Cyklefanatic]

I think you're right about that, in that not every angle of what is given can be covered by any single "logic bit". It's a mishmash, poorly thought out and lacking in information.

I can point to the mishmash in what I already quoted showing that they don't understand the terminology they are attempting to use in support of their rules. They say that motorized bikes come in 2 kinds; some that look like bicycles and are therefore pedelecs, and that pedelecs REQUIRE pedaling, and that anything powered up with throttle only, is an e-scooter.
AND that pedelecs can go anywhere bicycles can- something else which is refuted by the law.


But all that aside, there is no need to say that only a single viewpoint must explain everything in the mashup. The driving idea, I believe, is to limit ebikes to NO MORE THAN what an able rider can do

Since they do BOTH, it's a moot point.


The big threat should be obvious: 120mph capable ebikes on the horizon. On the sidewalk. That is a serious and realistic threat. So they in the dumbness try to put in reasonable controls and it's really working out fantastic so far. They haven't outlawed us yet or put onerous insurance and certification on the table.

Really 120MPH! Yeah with jet rockets and invisible shields!

 

[Handlebars]

Really 120MPH! Yeah with jet rockets and invisible shields!

1/2 way there already back in 2010.

https://newatlas.com/blacktrail-worlds-fastest-ebike/16290/

 

[Ken M]

"
Speed limits aren't the basis, obviously. Low enough speeds to be comparable to unassisted riding at it's best seems to be the basis.

An un-assisted rider was able to average over 33mph for an hour. I think if someone actually took the time to research where the 32kph/20mph assist limit came from we'd likely know it came from the 250-350W mid drive motor manufacturers that need the assist limit set in that range to have a competitive advantage vs geared and DD hub drives.

 

[Ken M]

This is the obvious question given that bike speed is not limited by the assist speed and speed limits are utilized to regulate the speed of other transportation products.

We all know this has been over-done in many forum strings which just shows that even the "model legislation" advocated by People for Bikes is still not considered well thought out.

 

[Handlebars]

An un-assisted rider was able to average over 33mph for an hour. I think if someone actually took the time to research where the 32kph/20mph assist limit came from we'd likely know it came from the 250-350W mid drive motor manufacturers that need the assist limit set in that range to have a competitive advantage vs geared and DD hub drives.

That would be a motive, then - not a basis.

 

[Handlebars]

...speed limits are utilized to regulate the speed of other transportation products.

Yes and no. Because speed limit is most often enforced by law and posted legal limits, not by ability, you can have a private vehicle CAPABLE of going well over any speed limit. Commercial trucks might have a governor to keep them under the highway speed limit, though, in some areas.

 

[steve mercier]

Whoa ...Handlebars it is ok to talk to yourself but try not to interrupt . (-:

 

[Handlebars]

Whoa ...Handlers it is ok to talk to yourself but try not to interrupt . (-:

How else are you gonna get a word in edgewise around here?

 

[Ken M]

That would be a motive, then - not a basis.

No, It's absolutely a valid data point. You position would be that assist speed should be set by the slowest of the mamby-pamby riders and that is not a good idea. Can you imagine if Bugatti, Lamborghini, Porsche, Ferrari had to design their cars for the slowest of drivers. Very sad day that would be.

There simply is no "safety" data that indicates that limiting assist speeds on ebikes is saving lives so it's just making my commute more time consuming.

 

[Ken M]

I can confidently say that the assist speed limit was promoted by mid drive motor manufacturers in Europe to ensure their dominate market share would be protected. They know that mid drives have an advantage of being more efficient at slower speeds and better torque from the gear ratios inside the motor and even the bike's drive train when the gearing for slow speed climbing is being utilized by the rider.

But a 1000W hub drive ebike at 25+ mph / 45+ kph is every bit as efficient as a mid drive and since the torque is applied directly at the rear wheel the mid drive's advantage is gone...and hence sales advantages if the public just educates themselves. It's easier to use lobby pressure to set low assist speeds where mid drives have a performance advantage.

If I'm not mistaken Bosch is like the biggest funding contributor to People for Bikes in the US and it's no surprise they advocate the EU assist speed policies - they want to sell the same slow underpowered ebikes world wide.

 

[Ken M]

Ok....back to the subject of the ebike in 2025....

Here's my take:

Doesn't matter really but a 1000W mid / 1200W geared hub / 2000W DD hub will all provide enough torque / power to hit assist speeds in the 35mph/55kph range which is just ideal for the product to remain an ebike and not require DOT level regulations because traditional bikes already achieve those speeds safely.

With that power the only use for drive system gearing is for cadence control for us humans to remained engaged. So I do like the idea of a single speed belt drive for best case simplicity. Sure adding transmission in a mid drive or something like the Pinion transmission on a hub drive would be great for keeping a rider engaged but at speeds over 28mph the rider really don't help much so I would prefer just a single speed belt drive.

Instead of having one large capacity battery the standard battery should be sized to allow most riders to do their daily commute needs so 50miles/75km is enough but have the option for a rear rack battery well above 1kwh.

No rear brake needed on a hub drive ebike if progressive regen is done right (we all should agree on that)

Keep the bike minimalist for riders that enjoy riding and let all the people that want integration for integration sake like GPS and being able to see motor and battery temps pay extra for that.

Tires are created that prove better suspension properties without impacting rolling resistance so the complexity and service requirements of mamby pamby suspensions can be done away with. With 2" or wider tires now that is really possible already but people have been marketed to believe they need suspension forks even when riding a street / urban mobility ebike.

Carbon becomes more and more popular on ebike but not because of it's weight savings but because the price keeps falling as fabrication techniques advance and structurally is just a better material than soft aluminum.

The bean counters are finally tossed out of the room and spokes are gone on ebike wheels as they really should be now. Magnesium wheels may be a bit more heavy but on an ebike who cares as they increase stability of the ebike at higher speeds.

 

[Handlebars]

No, It's absolutely a valid data point.

But it was supposedly to be a basis, not a data point.
and not a motive. It was given by you as a motive:

to have a competitive advantage vs geared and DD hub drives

You position would be that assist speed should be set by the slowest of the mamby-pamby riders

Wrong. I said

unassisted riding at it's best seems to be the basis.

Best , not slowest.

There simply is no "safety" data that indicates that limiting assist speeds on ebikes is saving lives so it's just making my commute more time consuming.

First off, not having data doesn't mean one way or the other. It simply means no data.
What we DO have is fairly well established that high speed capable vehicles are licensed and the drivers are licensed and insurance becomes necessary.

That would ruin the freedom we have, of wonderful, cheap, efficient and available e-biking.