Statement Regarding Potential CPSC Ebike Law Preemption of 3-class Legislation

[jabberwocky]

A LSEB and traditional bike by definition are same. They should be "use" regulated same even by the land managers that continue to want to claim ebikes are motor vehicles to make it sound like they compromised to allow class 1 access. I do consider it ignorance if they refuse to recognize that the feds say they are not motor vehicles.

When it comes to locally controlled public land, the federal definition doesn't really matter. The CPSC can say something is the same as a normal bike (or the state of VA can say the same thing) but local land managers still have control over their stuff and can allow/deny as they see fit. A common thread for you in this thread is the idea that once something is federally defined its just allowed everywhere a normal bike can go. It would be nice if that were the case and we could just have one fight, but thats not how it works. See my earlier comment about the department of the interior memo directing land under their control to come up with a plan for ebikes not automatically opening things up as much as people thought. Because it still had a provision that allowed the local land manager to make the ultimate call, and many said "nope".

This is a feature, not a bug, of pretty much all government in the US. The CPSC definition (or the VA state definition) is a useful framework to use when negotiating access, but it doesn't really help beyond that (unless all you care about is road access). At the fed level, you pretty much just need things to not be banned, so you can move to the state and then local level to continue the fight (for another MTB comparison, the STC is an org that fights to remove MTBs from the "mechanized transport" definition in federal wilderness so that local access can be determined on a case by case basis).

 

[Ken M]

Just to add to this, conspiracy-theorizing aside, this is pretty normal. IMBA has huge corporate support, for another example in cycling. They support tons of grassroots advocates (I know several volunteers with the local IMBA chapter who are tireless unpaid advocates) but bike companies don't throw money at an advocacy org like IMBA out of the goodness of their little corporate hearts. They know that increased access is good for business. It makes sense to invest in access where you can. People don't buy mountainbikes in places where they have nowhere to ride them.

Colorado requires ebrakes (ie brakes that disengages the drive system when applied) on all class 2 bikes (the one class that truly does not have any need for them).

A CLASS 2 ELECTRICAL ASSISTED BICYCLE MUST OPERATE IN A MANNER SO THAT THE ELECTRIC MOTOR IS DISENGAGED OR CEASES TO FUNCTION WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED.

On Class 1 and 3 the assist is supposed the disengage when a rider is not pedaling but I have two Haibike brand ebikes (one with a Yamaha mid and one with a Bosch mid) that when stopped and brakes applied the motor will start assisting when the weight of my foot / leg is just resting on the pedals.

CLASS 1 AND CLASS 3 ELECTRICAL ASSISTED BICYCLES MUST BE EQUIPPED WITH A MECHANISM OR CIRCUIT THAT CANNOT BE BYPASSED AND THAT CAUSES THE ELECTRIC MOTOR TO DISENGAGE OR CEASE TO FUNCTION WHEN THE RIDER STOPS PEDALING.

So I bought 3 ebikes (thinking they were compliant to ride on public infrastructure in Colorado and the class 1s on trails) and NONE of them are legal to ride anyplace in Colorado. Haibike even has their US headquarters here in Colorado and they just bury their heads in the sand as to this conflict existing.

Maybe conflicts between federal and state regulations are normal but I feel it would be best to clean up the regulatory conflicts now before it just gets worse.

 

[jabberwocky]

Maybe conflicts between federal and state regulations are normal but I feel it would be best to clean up the regulatory conflicts now before it just gets worse.

I agree, brake-motor cutoffs seem like a dumb requirement on any ebike. Not sure what the point of that provision is. I'm not aware of any pedal assist bike made by a major mfg that has any sort of brake cutoff built in, but they stop assisting the moment you stop pedaling.

 

[Ken M]

I agree, brake-motor cutoffs seem like a dumb requirement on any ebike. Not sure what the point of that provision is. I'm not aware of any pedal assist bike made by a major mfg that has any sort of brake cutoff built in, but they stop assisting the moment you stop pedaling.

I know Minnesota (Class 1 & 2) and Colorado (Class 2 only) require motor inhibiting brakes not required by the CPSC so I have not clue who regulates compliance for sale or use of these state regulations.

If you have a mid drive and you want to see if they really stop assisting the moment you stop pedaling try this. Be stopped and apply the brakes, then put pedal pressure on the crank while still stopped and I'm pretty sure you will hear the motor trying to commutate (that means the motor is trying to assist while actually not pedaling and still at a stop. This is something that can actually heat a motor quickly.

 

[kmccune]

Pedelecs are hugely popular and successful in Europe for commuting and transportation, a far greater % of the population uses ebikes in Europe than here. I'm not arguing that people don't want to go faster, most people do in general, including here, but you're stating an opinion, not a fact.


See above, it's working fine in Europe. If you're commuting at 24-30, you shouldn't be on a bike path, most bike paths have 15mph speed limits for a reason.


Your claim about the ignorance of land managers simply illustrates your own ignorance of land managers, how they operate, and the entire process of how bikes and ebikes get access. The ones I've worked with over the years are all aware of the pertinent regulations. It's a problem when they have various regulations and other jurisdictions to integrate with, the class system is an attempt to unify it. They have all flat out disregarded the CPSA regs since they don't have any bearing on use, just what can be sold. I know you don't agree with that, but that's the reality.


See above. The Class system did give land managers a way to allow ebikes where they weren't before. Lots of people are happy about it, and don't care any more than that.


P4B was always a lobbying group masquerading as advocacy, their mission is and always has been to sell bikes.

The trouble with "Land managers", per se is this, lets put it another way( unless I am off base) The gates were left open, theres litter everywhere.. Responsible People such as Us and most of the group are respectful and appreciate our privileges-the problem is there is a small set of yahoos that ruin it for everybody, It has got to the point around here an Ebike is only welcome were motorized vehicles are permitted on US Forest Service lands,I think the former "dirt Bike" craze had something to do with it, back in the day closed roads on US Forest Service lands wouldn't even allow Horses on them. Gradually the definitions change ,I suppose it is up to our group to increase the permissiveness of our favored modes of recreation through education and good citizenship. Assisted or augmented bicycles shouldn't not be in the same class as motorcycles or even ICE Scooters or Mopeds( IMO) there will probably have to be some sensible guidelines agreed upon.

 

[Ken M]

The trouble with "Land managers", per se is this, lets put it another way( unless I am off base) The gates were left open, theres litter everywhere.. Responsible People such as Us and most of the group are respectful and appreciate our privileges-the problem is there is a small set of yahoos that ruin it for everybody, It has got to the point around here an Ebike is only welcome were motorized vehicles are permitted on US Forest Service lands,I think the former "dirt Bike" craze had something to do with it, back in the day closed roads on US Forest Service lands wouldn't even allow Horses on them. Gradually the definitions change ,I suppose it is up to our group to increase the permissiveness of our favored modes of recreation through education and good citizenship. Assisted or augmented bicycles shouldn't not be in the same class as motorcycles or even ICE Scooters or Mopeds( IMO) there will probably have to be some sensible guidelines agreed upon.

That reiterates the point I've been trying to make. It's clear that many view "low speed electric bicycles" the same as motorized vehicles / motorcycles. No real effort was made to show that a federally compliant LSEB was OK to just consider a bike for "use" regulations on public infrastructure or trails. Then along comes PFBs advocacy (actually just a lobby group) on their white horse to save the day with 3-class policy that was loosely correlated to the federal definition and everyone thinks it's the solution. The problem is that the federal definition goes back to 2002 and was passed into law with an explicit preemptive clause to prevent states from impacting interstate commerce with unjustified more stringent regulation. If they would have just stuck to a focus on "use" and not trying to redefine everything would have been OK - just "use" regulated LSEBs as a bike and we all have access to a useful recreation and urban mobility product.

 

[Hightail Electric Bikes]

I have spent a good portion of my day today reading a fair amount of this interesting thread. I came across this forum based upon an internet search of the same subject. First allow me to introduce myself, I am a relative new comer to the ebike world, having started my new company within the past year or so. I am an engineer with a background in machine design and after importing some higher powered ebikes I have been recently developing my own bike to produced domestically. So, enough about me. I will go on record as saying the 3 class system has always seemed illogical. Perhaps not for the reasons you might expect. I have a company importing and developing ebikes but I personally own 3 motorcycles as well. So I have a big picture idea of what seems so wrong with the current legislation. It seems everyone is concerned about their special interests (I like trails...I want to go faster...I want to use bike lanes) I am aware this is an ebike forum, but it seems illogical to not consider all 2 or 3 wheeled motorized vehicles essentially the same. To differentiate ICE bikes vs electric bikes (vs steam powered bikes etc.) makes no sense to me. When you boil it all down, the lowest common denominator is 2 (or 3) wheeled vehicles with motors...Let's call them "motorbikes". I wrote an article (to myself haha) as a means of wrapping my head around this. I see no need for 3 classes of ebikes, rather I see maybe four classes of "motorbike". Motorbikes can have any artificial means of propulsion. Not to bore you (yet) with the details of these classifications, but a summary goes as such...

• All classes of motorbikes may or may not have pedals...who cares? Why do pedals make a difference? (pedals discriminate against the physically disabled)
• Motorbike classes are divided by top attainable speed and curb weight (not motor Wattage or BHP)
• Class 1 and 2 are lighter weight and slower speed and Must have GCC (General Certificate of Conformity) to CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) bicycle standard (Title 16 Part 1512 – Requirements for bicycles)
• Class 3 and 4 (over 40 mph and 150 lb curb weight) must conform to FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) as set forth by the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) for “Motor Driven Cycles”
• Class 4 is Motorcycle class pretty much as it already exists

My thoughts are encompassing all motorized vehicles with 2 or 3 wheels into one legislation. Abandon archaic terms such as scooter, moped, ebike etc. and do not differentiate between motor types. They are all now "motor bikes". Abandon separate laws and regulations for the aforementioned...who cares if it has a step through frame or a platform to rest your feet vs. foot pegs?

To those that say you have now created 4 classes out three well that's just not true. Because the 3 classes pertains to ebikes only and ignores the messy gray area. This concept now encompasses all motorized 2 or 3 wheeled vehicles under the sun. As a manufacturer it is impossible to design a bike for the US market unless you want to have 30 different configurations to be legally sold in all 50 states. This is the biggest detractor from domestic manufacturing...not the cost to produce here.

Anyway, I have written much more detail on this topic (again, to myself) and I will likely hear a lot of concerns or catch a lot of flack so tomorrow I might just attach or copy and paste my completed concept.

 

[J.R.]

I have spent a good portion of my day today reading a fair amount of this interesting thread. I came across this forum based upon an internet search of the same subject. First allow me to introduce myself, I am a relative new comer to the ebike world, having started my new company within the past year or so. I am an engineer with a background in machine design and after importing some higher powered ebikes I have been recently developing my own bike to produced domestically. So, enough about me. I will go on record as saying the 3 class system has always seemed illogical. Perhaps not for the reasons you might expect. I have a company importing and developing ebikes but I personally own 3 motorcycles as well. So I have a big picture idea of what seems so wrong with the current legislation. It seems everyone is concerned about their special interests (I like trails...I want to go faster...I want to use bike lanes) I am aware this is an ebike forum, but it seems illogical to not consider all 2 or 3 wheeled motorized vehicles essentially the same. To differentiate ICE bikes vs electric bikes (vs steam powered bikes etc.) makes no sense to me. When you boil it all down, the lowest common denominator is 2 (or 3) wheeled vehicles with motors...Let's call them "motorbikes". I wrote an article (to myself haha) as a means of wrapping my head around this. I see no need for 3 classes of ebikes, rather I see maybe four classes of "motorbike". Motorbikes can have any artificial means of propulsion. Not to bore you (yet) with the details of these classifications, but a summary goes as such...

• All classes of motorbikes may or may not have pedals...who cares? Why do pedals make a difference? (pedals discriminate against the physically disabled)
• Motorbike classes are divided by top attainable speed and curb weight (not motor Wattage or BHP)
• Class 1 and 2 are lighter weight and slower speed and Must have GCC (General Certificate of Conformity) to CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) bicycle standard (Title 16 Part 1512 – Requirements for bicycles)
• Class 3 and 4 (over 40 mph and 150 lb curb weight) must conform to FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) as set forth by the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) for “Motor Driven Cycles”
• Class 4 is Motorcycle class pretty much as it already exists

My thoughts are encompassing all motorized vehicles with 2 or 3 wheels into one legislation. Abandon archaic terms such as scooter, moped, ebike etc. and do not differentiate between motor types. They are all now "motor bikes". Abandon separate laws and regulations for the aforementioned...who cares if it has a step through frame or a platform to rest your feet vs. foot pegs?

To those that say you have now created 4 classes out three well that's just not true. Because the 3 classes pertains to ebikes only and ignores the messy gray area. This concept now encompasses all motorized 2 or 3 wheeled vehicles under the sun. As a manufacturer it is impossible to design a bike for the US market unless you want to have 30 different configurations to be legally sold in all 50 states. This is the biggest detractor from domestic manufacturing...not the cost to produce here.

Anyway, I have written much more detail on this topic (again, to myself) and I will likely hear a lot of concerns or catch a lot of flack so tomorrow I might just attach or copy and paste my completed concept.

There is a Class 4.

Class 4: Moped or Motorcycle
The electric drive system can be activated through a pedaling action or throttle. The top speed is above 28 mph (45 kph) and/or the motor wattage may be greater than 750 watts. In all major geographies this class would be considered a motor vehicle which requires licensing and registration and is limited to certain motorized off road trails or traditional roads. There has been some confusion in America where machines that resemble bicycles (having pedals) that are capable of high speed and power are used inappropriately without licensing or insurance and on infrastructure reserved for bicycles such as paths and mountain bike trails. This behavior is subject to the same legal action as driving a gas powered motorcycle or car and may result in severe legal ramifications.

What Are Electric Bike Classes and Why Do They Matter?

Hi guys! I'm moving some content off of the main site and into the most relevant categories of the forum. This post was originally made on October 10th 2016: As electric bicycles have become more popular in Europe, Asia and the Americas, different types of products have entered the space. Some...

electricbikereview.com

As a Class 4 is not an ebike it isn't included in ebike laws and regulations.

I am an engineer with a background in machine design and after importing some higher powered ebikes I have been recently developing my own bike to produced domestically.

It seems everyone is concerned about their special interests (I like trails...I want to go faster...I want to use bike lanes)

Seems like another special interest heard from.

I own a class 1 and a class 2, I've also been a motorcyclist for 50 years. Motorcycles do not belong on the same trails as children, walkers, hikers, pets and equestrians with horses. It isn't workable. There's more land and roads dedicated to high power off road vehicles than there is for bikes and ebikes. As someone that's been involved in lobbying for access, proposals like this are the things some regulators throw up as examples as to why these bikes should be banned en masse. 'Just ban them all, it's easier'.

As for calling them all motorbikes, that's a word many of us have tried to eradicate from ebikes for many years. Eight years for me. If you read any of the claims MTB'ers and hikers have made for years about Class 1 eMTB's damaging the trails, you'd know more about this fight and how hard it's been.

I'm not giving you any 'flack' and it's nothing personal, I think we have some common ground interests, but these ideas would set us back to a point worse than when we started. As a future brand you may want to attend some regulatory public meetings to better understand the history of the issue and where people stand on it.

There's barely enough money to maintain the land. Most of the money raised for new trails and paths is from private donations and in my state grants have come from fracking and shale oil fees. The latter is expected to be less under the current political climate. There is no money for enforcement and many of the proposals in this thread would require enforcement for them to work. I'd rather money go to more miles of trails and paths.

 

[ngl]

I think the one thing to remember is that class, 1, 2, and 3 all have the same legal power limits, all go uphill at the same speed assuming the manufacturer is using the full 750w, and will all do the same exact amount of trail damage because the physical torque potential is exactly the same, and falls off with speed, disregarding artificial differences created internally by a manufacturer. An upright seated bike on the level with a legal motor, average sized rider and no human input tops out at 24-26 mph in every case already due to wind resistance, which when electrified simply brings comfort bikes, mom, dad's, grandparents, and the kids up to the same par when riding together. If you have a class 3, you can take advantage of that motor power on the street segments but are technically illegal on the cycle paths no matter how fast you're going in many states, otherwise you just are stuck with a class 1 that is legal on the paths but exposed to a bit more traffic hazzard by going more slowly on the road segments with a greater speed delta vs. cagers. A true shame as every path I've ever ridden has both types of segments on the route.

Enrorcement would be needed in any case, as class system restrictions (or any laws) are meaningless without enforcement, so we can at least be thankful that there isn't a heavy hand to go with the class system. But the enforcement to detect the wrong stickers, uncapped ebikes, would cost the same, or perhaps even more, since speed enforcement is fairly automate-able.

The industry got marketing tiers, land managers seem happy with no throttle, so at least some people go home happy with the current use system. It kinda sucks for my and my wife's use cases of mixed road and trail, but I never cared much for law anyway I guess

 

[J.R.]

I think the one thing to remember is that class, 1, 2, and 3 all have the same legal power limits, all go uphill at the same speed assuming the manufacturer is using the full 750w, and will all do the same exact amount of trail damage because the physical torque potential is exactly the same, and falls off with speed, disregarding artificial differences created internally by a manufacturer. An upright seated bike on the level with a legal motor, average sized rider and no human input tops out at 24-26 mph in every case already due to wind resistance, which when electrified simply brings comfort bikes, mom, dad's, grandparents, and the kids up to the same par when riding together. If you have a class 3, you can take advantage of that motor power on the street segments but are technically illegal on the cycle paths no matter how fast you're going in many states, otherwise you just are stuck with a class 1 that is legal on the paths but exposed to a bit more traffic hazzard by going more slowly on the road segments with a greater speed delta vs. cagers. A true shame as every path I've ever ridden has both types of segments on the route.

Enrorcement would be needed in any case, as class system restrictions (or any laws) are meaningless without enforcement, so we can at least be thankful that there isn't a heavy hand to go with the class system. But the enforcement to detect the wrong stickers, uncapped ebikes, would cost the same, or perhaps even more, since speed enforcement is fairly automate-able.

The industry got marketing tiers, land managers seem happy with no throttle, so at least some people go home happy with the current use system. It kinda sucks for my and my wife's use cases of mixed road and trail, but I never cared much for law anyway I guess

I can agree with some of that. Enforcement is far more costly than just speed enforcement and ticketing bikes that are not legally entitled to ride public land. If it was just a speeding ticket, automated or given by a law enforcement officer, that could be done. How is it handled? Many jurisdictions, a speeding ticket for recreation vehicles or ORV, the ticket is actually entered on a driving license. Do we require a driving license to ride an ebike? Riding an illegal ebike on a trail or path is often a trespassing violation. In my county that's a criminal offense with an $800 fine. Very often these violations go to court. Does the community at large want additional court time and expense.

There's a hidden issue that I hesitated to mention because it's very complicated and it took me weeks to investigate. Liability. Many parks, paths and trails actually pay little for insurance and large municipalities are often self insured. To maintain the low cost, the authority has to take all reasonable precautions to ensure the general public's safety. Things like signage, warnings, railings so no one goes off into a stream. Most of these venues are 'use at your own risk'. You can't sue as long as all reasonable precautions are taken. Having bikes that are capable of being ridden as fast as a pro cyclist can ride, being ridden by the average 50 year old with a pot belly and diminished physical strength and reflexes is not taking all reasonable precautions to ensure the public's safety. And again the throttle issue comes into play. Costs would be crazy to enforce safety. And insurance needs would change. Law suits would surely rise. These issues were raised locally where we did win access for class 1.

It's all much more complicated than most realize. If all the responsibility rests with the law breaker, costs can remain low. If a class 2 or 3 (or 4) rider causes a problem where they are banned from riding, they are responsible for every issue that arises from their actions. If all 3 classes are legal and something happens, the local authority can be held responsible. The price of trails just went up.

We've gained a lot.

 

[ngl]

Heh, yes very true, it's all very dependent on jurisdiction. Where I just moved from, real speed tickets were moving violations and *camera* speeding tickets were just administrative "fines" with no points and not much if any legal standing, which you could pay if you wanted to, or if you didn't it just goes to collections through the camera company that gives the cameras out for free to local coppers so they can get their chunk of the revenue from people who do pay. I certainly don't want freely provided Amazon Smile! facial recognition speed cameras on my trials...

And of course all classes of bike can go as fast as "road bike speed" though, at least on the down hill parts

If lobbying using class limits that only make material physical differences in speed on the portion of trails that are between exactly level and almost exactly level did manage to be the deciding factor to get you guys more ORV access, good going, I'm happy for you all. I was just watching a YT today of a guy who was riding a recumbent trike handcycle on a pretty rocky but fairly level-looking trail and having a blast, but he didn't mention what class it was. It was an Italian imported bike on a Bafang platform, no throttle afaik. He may or may not have been legal to the letter, but he was smiling ear to ear at any rate!

 

[jabberwocky]

Speed enforcement is a loser as a solution because everything has been ok as is with existing user groups for decades, so if you come to the table as a new user with the position “give me what I want and solve potential issues by setting up a new enforcement mechanism you didn’t need before”, well, that’s not exactly a strong offer. Why would any land manager agree to that, and why would existing user groups be happy with it? That’s saying “we are allowing a new type of vehicle onto the trails that’s so fast we need to setup speed limit signs and figure out how to enforce them”. It’s basically signing up for a massive headache for no discernible gain.

People generally don’t do that.

 

[Ken M]

I have spent a good portion of my day today reading a fair amount of this interesting thread. I came across this forum based upon an internet search of the same subject. First allow me to introduce myself, I am a relative new comer to the ebike world, having started my new company within the past year or so. I am an engineer with a background in machine design and after importing some higher powered ebikes I have been recently developing my own bike to produced domestically. So, enough about me. I will go on record as saying the 3 class system has always seemed illogical. Perhaps not for the reasons you might expect. I have a company importing and developing ebikes but I personally own 3 motorcycles as well. So I have a big picture idea of what seems so wrong with the current legislation. It seems everyone is concerned about their special interests (I like trails...I want to go faster...I want to use bike lanes) I am aware this is an ebike forum, but it seems illogical to not consider all 2 or 3 wheeled motorized vehicles essentially the same. To differentiate ICE bikes vs electric bikes (vs steam powered bikes etc.) makes no sense to me. When you boil it all down, the lowest common denominator is 2 (or 3) wheeled vehicles with motors...Let's call them "motorbikes". I wrote an article (to myself haha) as a means of wrapping my head around this. I see no need for 3 classes of ebikes, rather I see maybe four classes of "motorbike". Motorbikes can have any artificial means of propulsion. Not to bore you (yet) with the details of these classifications, but a summary goes as such...

• All classes of motorbikes may or may not have pedals...who cares? Why do pedals make a difference? (pedals discriminate against the physically disabled)
• Motorbike classes are divided by top attainable speed and curb weight (not motor Wattage or BHP)
• Class 1 and 2 are lighter weight and slower speed and Must have GCC (General Certificate of Conformity) to CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) bicycle standard (Title 16 Part 1512 – Requirements for bicycles)
• Class 3 and 4 (over 40 mph and 150 lb curb weight) must conform to FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) as set forth by the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) for “Motor Driven Cycles”
• Class 4 is Motorcycle class pretty much as it already exists

My thoughts are encompassing all motorized vehicles with 2 or 3 wheels into one legislation. Abandon archaic terms such as scooter, moped, ebike etc. and do not differentiate between motor types. They are all now "motor bikes". Abandon separate laws and regulations for the aforementioned...who cares if it has a step through frame or a platform to rest your feet vs. foot pegs?

To those that say you have now created 4 classes out three well that's just not true. Because the 3 classes pertains to ebikes only and ignores the messy gray area. This concept now encompasses all motorized 2 or 3 wheeled vehicles under the sun. As a manufacturer it is impossible to design a bike for the US market unless you want to have 30 different configurations to be legally sold in all 50 states. This is the biggest detractor from domestic manufacturing...not the cost to produce here.

Anyway, I have written much more detail on this topic (again, to myself) and I will likely hear a lot of concerns or catch a lot of flack so tomorrow I might just attach or copy and paste my completed concept.

Hi, I'm the guy that started the thread and it's true that I have petitioned the CPSC to preempt the state 3-class system given it has clear interstate commerce issues (not to mention that it's essentially brain dead policy).

Your class 1/2 (not sure why you had 2 stated) with GCC to CPSC 1512 is exactly what I'm hoping for (essentially a return to the 2002 federal law that a PhD electrical engineer had input into.This should be class 1 or just called a "low speed electric bicycle" and states are to regulate use as a bicycle (not parsed to make trail managers feel good about them selves having the power to ban something).

Class 2 is what really is just called a moped in my view. From 1-5 bhp and not allowed on highways or interstates with speeds 55mph or over. Simplified registrations and insurance requirements.

Class 3 is what really should just be motorcycles with over 5 bhp. M-class licenses, motorcycle registration and whatever general vehicle insurance is required.

I'm not concerned about syntax like Class 1 or LSEB or scooter / Class 2 or moped / Class 3 or motorcycle. NHTSA was only transferring "low speed electric bicycles to the CPSC with the stipulation that 20mph motor alone was targeted (does not mean human power can not add a bit more speed which is why LSEBs can be compelling without the DMVs and insurance companies trying to again get revenue from bikes as they have historically). I'm still a huge fan of mopeds and would like to see that 1-5 bhp class product be allowed to 45mph because that would dramatically make them safer on most urban roads (still keep them off highways and interstates though and leave that the domain of motorcyles with M-class license, registrations, and insurance as true motor vehicle).

Anyway, I would very very much like to chat with you about your idea. I'm a mechanical engineer and very much want to see an new generation of ebikes made in the USA. If some interest in talking more we'll figure out a way to exchange contact information (I need to be careful because trail managers and their devout followers do not like me much as they think I'm trying to take away their trail riding rights).

 

[ngl]

Yup, almost all enforcement is a loser, basically. Trail users are going to use the trails as they see fit, just as average road users go the design speed of roadways and not what the numbers say on the speed signs, and the only way you'll change behavior is through lobbying the trail users directly for it, or harsher enforcement. Imagine trying to change behaviors by putting speed regulating brake clamping devices on all legal road bikes so that they were "class 1 bike path legal" and then ticketing the ones who didn't have it. Oh my god the richest and most lucrative bike customers would be furious! Meanwhile all e-bikers with the wrong sticker on the bike but going the speed limit or under are technically criminal scofflaws operating by the grace of incomplete policing. The best defense is to blend in with the consumer group(s) who spend the most money, that way you look like a duck, talk like a duck, and people will think you're a duck. Be rich, or at least look it

 

[Ken M]

There is a Class 4.

Class 4: Moped or Motorcycle
The electric drive system can be activated through a pedaling action or throttle. The top speed is above 28 mph (45 kph) and/or the motor wattage may be greater than 750 watts. In all major geographies this class would be considered a motor vehicle which requires licensing and registration and is limited to certain motorized off road trails or traditional roads. There has been some confusion in America where machines that resemble bicycles (having pedals) that are capable of high speed and power are used inappropriately without licensing or insurance and on infrastructure reserved for bicycles such as paths and mountain bike trails. This behavior is subject to the same legal action as driving a gas powered motorcycle or car and may result in severe legal ramifications.

What Are Electric Bike Classes and Why Do They Matter?

Hi guys! I'm moving some content off of the main site and into the most relevant categories of the forum. This post was originally made on October 10th 2016: As electric bicycles have become more popular in Europe, Asia and the Americas, different types of products have entered the space. Some...

electricbikereview.com

As a Class 4 is not an ebike it isn't included in ebike laws and regulations.





Seems like another special interest heard from.

I own a class 1 and a class 2, I've also been a motorcyclist for 50 years. Motorcycles do not belong on the same trails as children, walkers, hikers, pets and equestrians with horses. It isn't workable. There's more land and roads dedicated to high power off road vehicles than there is for bikes and ebikes. As someone that's been involved in lobbying for access, proposals like this are the things some regulators throw up as examples as to why these bikes should be banned en masse. 'Just ban them all, it's easier'.

As for calling them all motorbikes, that's a word many of us have tried to eradicate from ebikes for many years. Eight years for me. If you read any of the claims MTB'ers and hikers have made for years about Class 1 eMTB's damaging the trails, you'd know more about this fight and how hard it's been.

I'm not giving you any 'flack' and it's nothing personal, I think we have some common ground interests, but these ideas would set us back to a point worse than when we started. As a future brand you may want to attend some regulatory public meetings to better understand the history of the issue and where people stand on it.

There's barely enough money to maintain the land. Most of the money raised for new trails and paths is from private donations and in my state grants have come from fracking and shale oil fees. The latter is expected to be less under the current political climate. There is no money for enforcement and many of the proposals in this thread would require enforcement for them to work. I'd rather money go to more miles of trails and paths.

I don't think he was suggesting allowing motorcycles to ride on sidewalks and park trails. I believe that is way out of context but I could be wrong. I just took it as he doesn't think we need to parse 3 different classes from a 750W "low speed electric bicycle" definition per HR727 (Slice it into 50 classes and they'll all do the same damage to trails and hikers will still think bikes are riding too fast). Oh, and trail managers will always view ebikes as motor vehicles so best to find a way to remove their power to deny trail access subjectively.

As far as the 3-class policy pushed by People for Bikes there is no Class 4 but it has been tossed out there occasionally to be catch-all for ebikes not compliant with the federal regulation.

 

[Ken M]

Yup, almost all enforcement is a loser, basically. Trail users are going to use the trails as they see fit, just as average road users go the design speed of roadways and not what the numbers say on the speed signs, and the only way you'll change behavior is through lobbying the trail users directly for it, or harsher enforcement. Imagine trying to change behaviors by putting speed regulating brake clamping devices on all legal road bikes so that they were "class 1 bike path legal" and then ticketing the ones who didn't have it. Oh my god the richest and most lucrative bike customers would be furious! Meanwhile all e-bikers with the wrong sticker on the bike but going the speed limit or under are technically criminal scofflaws operating by the grace of incomplete policing. The best defense is to blend in with the consumer group(s) who spend the most money, that way you look like a duck, talk like a duck, and people will think you're a duck. Be rich, or at least look it

I love the PFB model legislation statement that says you should not alter an ebike but if you do you have to change the sticker. Anyone that thinks I'm just making that up please read the model legislation document on People for Bikes website. We need more companies printing stickers.

 

[Ken M]

That is so dishonest and disrespectful. These aren't powerful people flexing their will. You are so insulting to good people that are forced into a situation that would give Solomon trouble. I've had heartfelt conversations with land managers. Many genuinely want to see the most people possible enjoying public land. Many want to include ebikers and go out of their way trying to figure out a way to do it. Many came out on their own time to a demo ride we set up. They are far more open minded than you are. They are teachable.

No matter how many times I share personal experiences of this matter, you continue to insult and demean the character of people you know nothing about. I couldn't read past that line. Everytime you pull that crap you lose the argument. Everytime you pull that crap, you lose support for the ebike cause.

Tell me how CPSC compliant low speed electric bicycles, one with throttle-assist and one with pedal-assist, will impact trail wear differently or have different impact on trail safety. I view it as disrespectful when someone just expects you to accept what they tell you. Did anyone ever ask the trail managers to explain their opinion? How come no trail managers seem to ever post anything on EBR?

I'm open-minded to any information that is not just subjective .... i.e. the fact some don't like throttles is not objective or data driven. I honestly do believe the throttle-hate originates from the mindset that they are "motor vehicles" and pedal-assist ebikes are considered closer to a "non motorized" bike. They can have same motor, same performance, etc. but one can go on the trail and the other can't ...just seems too subjective so my respect is going down without something to understand the other point of view.

I'm sorry I'm getting a bit blunt but I just want to push those that keep claiming that 3-class is the reason so many trails opened up but have not been able to provide much support for the claim. I understand that class 1 was OK but why was Class 2 not OK and class 3 not OK (not like class 1 can't be ridden faster than 20mph on even a mild descent). As pointed out by another contributor to this thread, the physics just don't support there will be any difference between Class 1, 2, or 3 when it comes to trail wear and tear and has anyone seen any safety studies showing an impact of the 3 classes on trails in the real world.

 

[kmccune]

I have spent a good portion of my day today reading a fair amount of this interesting thread. I came across this forum based upon an internet search of the same subject. First allow me to introduce myself, I am a relative new comer to the ebike world, having started my new company within the past year or so. I am an engineer with a background in machine design and after importing some higher powered ebikes I have been recently developing my own bike to produced domestically. So, enough about me. I will go on record as saying the 3 class system has always seemed illogical. Perhaps not for the reasons you might expect. I have a company importing and developing ebikes but I personally own 3 motorcycles as well. So I have a big picture idea of what seems so wrong with the current legislation. It seems everyone is concerned about their special interests (I like trails...I want to go faster...I want to use bike lanes) I am aware this is an ebike forum, but it seems illogical to not consider all 2 or 3 wheeled motorized vehicles essentially the same. To differentiate ICE bikes vs electric bikes (vs steam powered bikes etc.) makes no sense to me. When you boil it all down, the lowest common denominator is 2 (or 3) wheeled vehicles with motors...Let's call them "motorbikes". I wrote an article (to myself haha) as a means of wrapping my head around this. I see no need for 3 classes of ebikes, rather I see maybe four classes of "motorbike". Motorbikes can have any artificial means of propulsion. Not to bore you (yet) with the details of these classifications, but a summary goes as such...

• All classes of motorbikes may or may not have pedals...who cares? Why do pedals make a difference? (pedals discriminate against the physically disabled)
• Motorbike classes are divided by top attainable speed and curb weight (not motor Wattage or BHP)
• Class 1 and 2 are lighter weight and slower speed and Must have GCC (General Certificate of Conformity) to CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) bicycle standard (Title 16 Part 1512 – Requirements for bicycles)
• Class 3 and 4 (over 40 mph and 150 lb curb weight) must conform to FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) as set forth by the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) for “Motor Driven Cycles”
• Class 4 is Motorcycle class pretty much as it already exists

My thoughts are encompassing all motorized vehicles with 2 or 3 wheels into one legislation. Abandon archaic terms such as scooter, moped, ebike etc. and do not differentiate between motor types. They are all now "motor bikes". Abandon separate laws and regulations for the aforementioned...who cares if it has a step through frame or a platform to rest your feet vs. foot pegs?

To those that say you have now created 4 classes out three well that's just not true. Because the 3 classes pertains to ebikes only and ignores the messy gray area. This concept now encompasses all motorized 2 or 3 wheeled vehicles under the sun. As a manufacturer it is impossible to design a bike for the US market unless you want to have 30 different configurations to be legally sold in all 50 states. This is the biggest detractor from domestic manufacturing...not the cost to produce here.

Anyway, I have written much more detail on this topic (again, to myself) and I will likely hear a lot of concerns or catch a lot of flack so tomorrow I might just attach or copy and paste my completed concept.

Some "Logic" there, can you show us what you are proposing to vend?

 

[Hightail Electric Bikes]

There is a Class 4.

Class 4: Moped or Motorcycle
The electric drive system can be activated through a pedaling action or throttle. The top speed is above 28 mph (45 kph) and/or the motor wattage may be greater than 750 watts. In all major geographies this class would be considered a motor vehicle which requires licensing and registration and is limited to certain motorized off road trails or traditional roads. There has been some confusion in America where machines that resemble bicycles (having pedals) that are capable of high speed and power are used inappropriately without licensing or insurance and on infrastructure reserved for bicycles such as paths and mountain bike trails. This behavior is subject to the same legal action as driving a gas powered motorcycle or car and may result in severe legal ramifications.

What Are Electric Bike Classes and Why Do They Matter?

Hi guys! I'm moving some content off of the main site and into the most relevant categories of the forum. This post was originally made on October 10th 2016: As electric bicycles have become more popular in Europe, Asia and the Americas, different types of products have entered the space. Some...

electricbikereview.com

As a Class 4 is not an ebike it isn't included in ebike laws and regulations.





Seems like another special interest heard from.

I own a class 1 and a class 2, I've also been a motorcyclist for 50 years. Motorcycles do not belong on the same trails as children, walkers, hikers, pets and equestrians with horses. It isn't workable. There's more land and roads dedicated to high power off road vehicles than there is for bikes and ebikes. As someone that's been involved in lobbying for access, proposals like this are the things some regulators throw up as examples as to why these bikes should be banned en masse. 'Just ban them all, it's easier'.

As for calling them all motorbikes, that's a word many of us have tried to eradicate from ebikes for many years. Eight years for me. If you read any of the claims MTB'ers and hikers have made for years about Class 1 eMTB's damaging the trails, you'd know more about this fight and how hard it's been.

I'm not giving you any 'flack' and it's nothing personal, I think we have some common ground interests, but these ideas would set us back to a point worse than when we started. As a future brand you may want to attend some regulatory public meetings to better understand the history of the issue and where people stand on it.

There's barely enough money to maintain the land. Most of the money raised for new trails and paths is from private donations and in my state grants have come from fracking and shale oil fees. The latter is expected to be less under the current political climate. There is no money for enforcement and many of the proposals in this thread would require enforcement for them to work. I'd rather money go to more miles of trails and paths.

Class 4 is a lame attempt to throw everything on two wheels with a motor over the 750W limit into one category as if to say "I only care about riding on trails so anything over 750W doesn't matter". It is one of the first points I was trying to make...you need to step back form the thing that you are so intensely focused on and see the bigger picture and re-envision a system for the situation today and into the future...not the situation related to trail access only. I can't bring myself to apologize for calling a bike with a motor a "motorbike". It just makes too much sense. What is in a word anyway?
For that matter what is a Moped? Look it up, state by state, and you will see numerous definitions. Same with Scooter. Personally I don't have much stake in the whole trail issue, which by the way is one small part of the topic, perhaps not the main topic (although that's fine if that's what is important to you--we all have our "main concerns"). I'm OK with 20mph limit on bikes that can be allowed on federal land trails designated for bikes. But I fail to see why someone with a physical disability that does not allow them to pedal sufficiently should be discriminated against especially when there is no data to prove throttle only bikes with the 20 mph limit do any more damage than a human powered bikes to the trails. The perception that if throttle bikes were allowed, that this would cause an inordinate amount of yahoos doing wheelies down the trails and running moms and pets over I think is propaganda...if it is said enough times people will begin to believe it. For the MTB'ers, saying "we were here first so get off my trails", well that was then. They don't own the land and frankly, they don't make the rules. I understand they want to protect what they believe is theirs but you can't stand in the way of progress. I think there is an adjustment period that once we're through it everyone will agree it was much ado about nothing. BTW, unless this changed within the last few weeks, just because the BLM has approved "ebikes" for trail use on federal land, that doesn't mean anything has changed on the ground. The land managers need to go through a process to open trails to ebikes (whichever trails the land manager chooses). This may or may not happen and if it does it could take months or years. So if someone is packing up their class 1 ebike and headed to the federal land trails thinking you're good to go you might be in for a surprise.
I understand the history--everybody wants to control who can use the trails. I wouldn't want any setbacks for ebike usage of these trails. The only difference between what I am saying and where we are now is I don't see why a 750W throttle bike limited to 20mph should not be allowed and why it should have a separate class--as the OP's original post was advocating. Beyond that, my main concern is, again, big picture stuff. The mass acceptance of ebikes for personal use beyond the 750W limit is being hindered greatly by the lack of comprehensive laws at the federal level (and thus state level). Like it or not, there is a wave of 2 wheeled EV's coming that are in the 3-8KW range that don't fit any of the current "classes". So it is why I proposed a class of motorbike that was not LSEB and not motorcycle...and this class encompasses all 2 or 3 wheeled motorized vehicles regardless of motor type or"style" (style meaning "moped", "scooter", etc). The differentiators are a combination of top speed and curb weight. Other factors would be related to the motorcycle regulations such as minimum seat height, lights (working brake lights, turn signals etc.) This is an important class of "motorbike" as they would be lighter weight yet fast enough to keep up with traffic. These types of bikes will be more approachable than full size motorcycles to the masses of people who do not want to go back to mass transportation. On the state level, likely these bikes will need to be registered and insured and the rider may need some type of endorsement on their drivers license. This is the class of bike that is currently the "wild west" due to the lawlessness.
I agree more money would be great. It's mind boggling how our government squanders it.

 

[Hightail Electric Bikes]

Some "Logic" there, can you show us what you are proposing to vend?

What do you mean by "proposing to vend"?