It does seem the 3-Class system can’t be manageable in the long term… the ‘logical argument’ part of my brain wants to tell me that no after-market overrides would be defensible in court (ie, going down a Class would be the more common “defensive move” taken by a rider, to make their more potent bike appear as a lower Class device) – if pressed, it is too easy to imagine “The bike was listed by the manufacturer as Class 3 at time of your purchase; therefore you own a Class 3 and are thus confined by the Class laws; neither your downgrade feature applied at the controller nor an applied decal saying otherwise, makes it into a Class 2.”
But the ‘reasonable argument’ part of my brain says a Class 3 with an applied/activated restriction to limit to 20mph, dutifully/honestly deployed by the rider
every time the trail required, should be enough to drop the case… but really, how likely is that to happen (and how likely are you to eliminate any doubt as to whether the limiter
was dutifully deployed?) in the event of actual litigation against you.
The opposite approach seems to pose similar pesky problems – you dutifully buy a Class 1 or 2, but then there are ways to remove the artificial speed limiter – now you can exceed the Assisted Max Speeds of your purchased Class… while under my “logic brain” above, it would seem you could be safe in court – having dutifully bought a Class 1 or 2, you’d argue your position as solid – But it is also too easy to imagine the lawyers arguing, successfully, “Yes, but then you willfully modified it to achieve higher assist speeds than your purchased Class allows, so you now have a fraudulent ebike deemed in violation.”)
But beyond that, the 3-Class system seems to me flawed by being based on Assisted Max Speed at all. Many analog bikers can exceed the Class 3 speed limit of 28mph, especially under favorable trail conditions… and many more-serious analog bikers can break that limit under a broader range of less favorable trail conditions. On downhills alone,
everyone could exceed 28 on an analog bike; I'll hit 33mph (if I don’t feather my brakes) just via gravity alone (no pedaling, having no throttle) when I roll down a specific moderate slope on one of my local trails. It has always felt to me the 3-Class system looks like a sort of knee-jerk reaction by folks who didn't really understand the cyclists already on trails before ebikes arrived, and so thought about assisted speeds with perhaps, automobiles as their point of reference. They seem to have imagined/feared all ebikes will always execute every ride at a constant, steady 28mph (or whatever top limit the Class has) as if it were a car set on cruise control riding down the trail!
With analogs capable of exceeding Class speed limits already, it seems a misguided way to define ebike restrictions. In my 'snarky brain', it reads like “Well, when the analog biker crashes into a pedestrian at 30mph, at least we envision they were using their muscles primarily -- so athletic, so powerfully graceful in form! -- and that is better and more fitting as a result; no need to limit those riders in any way! But we need to ensure these new ebikers can only hit pedestrians at let's say, 20 or maybe 28mph, cuz, you know, they’re relying far less on muscles and so… you know… let’s restrict that, for some reason. And let’s be sure we don't ask ourselves about the ebiker who IS using all their muscles and gets the bike past the 28 limit we wrongly think the bike automatically obeys…"
