Throttles and California

[m@Robertson]

Yeah my power limits are there to allow me to carry things, and not drive my car. I carried three bags of gravel back from Home Depot over the weekend. I believe that was 165 lbs of cargo. I didn't exceed 10 mph and I climbed grades that were as steep as 16%. Thats a car trip if you own a 750w bike. Same goes for my weekend Costco and grocery store runs the weekend before. OR the housewife who carries her kids on a cargo bike. a hard 750w limit wipes the entire cargo bike segment out of existence in CA. We're just starting to see them become commonplace here in the Monterey Bay Area. I don't see them going away. Especially when legislators who have an agenda to reduce vehicle traffic and automobile use realize they just destroyed that form of alternative transportation.

 

[Dewey]

I know what you said in the thread, but you missed 312.5(d)(1). You were looking only at the preamble, the opener to 312.5 and 312.5(d)(2). 312.5(d)(1) stands entirely on its own as an independent restriction, and is new to the vehicle code. It complements 312.5(d)(2) and between the both of them, imposes the hard 750w limit that can't be gotten around anymore.

Thank you Matt, the wording "or to attain more than 750 watts of power" is indeed separate from "motor power", therefore as you say does not qualify the sub-clause below which does refer to motor power. As power attainment is governed by the controller power setting this presumably means 750w peak power, although that precise wording is not written a reasonable person could infer that to mean peak power. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, etc.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, etc.

Don't feel bad. Those lawmakers clearly weren't electrical engineers.

 

[m@Robertson]

Don't feel bad. Those lawmakers clearly weren't electrical engineers.

Nor did they bother asking the advice of one. Or even someone on this forum. The whole v * a = w thing is a foreign concept. As is what it takes a mother with a small child to pedal up a hill with a couple bags of groceries (my neighbor fits this exact description and rides a Globe Haul ST). Incompetent legislators writing knee-jerk, grab-bag legislation.

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
--H. L. Mencken

 

[Dewey]

I defer to subject matter expertise. If only the law did the same consistently…. Reminds me of Gov LePetomane’s cabinet in Blazing Saddles fretting over protecting their “phoney baloney jobs.” Harrumph. Get your pies for the great legal pie fight. Only the finest legal opinions available. I have my opinions and on these I stand…other opinions are available for a negotiable fee. Etc. ad nauseam.

I agree with the opinion this serves to further fragment the US ebike market. UL certification in New York only, now followed by a hard 750w limit and no throttles on Class 3 in California only.

 

[m@Robertson]

Looks like Electrek decided to give this 750w issue its own dedicated article, that just came out.

New California law makes crystal clear which electric bikes are now 'illegal'

California has led the nation in electric bicycle adoption, helping more people than ever before switch away from cars and...

electrek.co

They are citing exactly the provisions I am above. The specific bit on the 750w hard limit:

Additionally, any e-bike that can be unlocked to offer higher than 750W (one horsepower) will now also fall outside the confines of electric bicycles in California. This regulation, based on power instead of speed, is in effect a much wider net that will likely catch many – if not most- of the electric bicycles currently on the road. There has long been a 750W limit for e-bikes in the US, but this has traditionally been treated as a continuous power limit. The peak power of such e-bikes is usually higher, often landing in the 900-1,300W range. The new California law removes the word “continuous” from the regulation, meaning motors that are capable of briefly exceeding the 750W motor (i.e. most 750W motors), will now fall outside of electric bicycle regulations.

And he sees the potential problem as well with existing '750w' bikes.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

What I want to know is who pressed for the language change to a hard 750W limit? And what was their thinking, if any?

 

[Slaphappygamer]

What I want to know is who pressed for the language charge to a hard 750W limit? And what was their thinking, if any?

I can hear that conversation now. “Well, 750 watts is one horsepower. Let’s set that as the limit. We don’t need bikes with motors stronger than the lawnmower.”

 

[m@Robertson]

What I want to know is who pressed for the language charge to a hard 750W limit? And what was their thinking, if any?

If you followed the bill as it went from its initial proposal to its final form, you would have seen it morph from a pretty straightforward battery safety bill to the plate of spaghetti we have now. IIRC the hard 750w limit showed up only a month or two before it went to its final vote.

I haven't heard of anyone taking ownership of the power limit. I am guessing it was someone who wanted to punish Sur Ron and Super 73 riders, but who also didn't understand the subject well enough to realize what it is they were actually doing. I can't imagine it was their plan to render most ebikes illegal in the state.

Unless you put your tinfoil hat on and theorize that they wear spandex on their commute into work and saw this as an opportunity to stab ebikes in the heart. Cuz thats what just happened.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

Unless you put your tinfoil hat on and theorize that they wear spandex on their commute into work and saw this as an opportunity to stab ebikes in the heart. Cuz thats what just happened.

Foil happens to be a good color on me, but the old saying still applies: Never ascribe to conspiracy what you can explain with ignorance, incompetence, or neglect.

 

[jabberwocky]

I haven't heard of anyone taking ownership of the power limit. I am guessing it was someone who wanted to punish Sur Ron and Super 73 riders, but who also didn't understand the subject well enough to realize what it is they were actually doing. I can't imagine it was their plan to render most ebikes illegal in the state.

Unless you put your tinfoil hat on and theorize that they wear spandex on their commute into work and saw this as an opportunity to stab ebikes in the heart. Cuz thats what just happened.

The charitable explanation is they wanted a bludgeon to wield against the most problematic manufacturers thats harder to wiggle out of. The uncharitable (and more likely) explanation is they didn't really know what they were doing.

Its frustrating as an ebike rider, but we (collectively) absolutely brought it on ourselves. The industry and community has had zero interest in self regulation in the US, which historically means eventually the government gets pushed to step in and do it.

 

[Dewey]

What I want to know is who pressed for the language change to a hard 750W limit? And what was their thinking, if any?

According to the transcript of the Aug 26 Assembly hearing, after the wording change, Laura Friedman emphasized the battery safety aspects of SB 1271 while acknowledging it changes the definition of an e-bike, but as Matt says its not clear who actually changed the wording. Friedman gets a 118% pro-transportation rating among California Assemblymen on the StreetsForAll Mobility report card so it might be worth contacting her to see if she knows?

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Yeah but your example is just there for argumentation. You are willfully ignoring obvious reality by citing an ancient outlier. A 48v bike has a 54.6v charge at 100%. In order for a 48v system to fit under the 750w absolute limit, it has to have a controller whose PEAK output is no more powerful than 13a, which yields a 710w bike. 14 amps makes the bike 764w and thus illegal. And if you know anything about USA ebike sales, a 13a controller on a 48v system is essentially nonexistent. Unless you get some guy in Europe trying to start an argument for the sake of it. Again

It is the issue for you, American e-bike builders who can only use the Chinese crap for your builds. And of course thousands brands of stamped illegal Chinese "e-bikes" sold in the U.S.
A user of a legal production e-bike does not even know what a "controller" is, where it is located, and they never use a multimetre

My typical cruising speed on my commuter was 30-34 mph, and I achieved that with a bike I geared myself with a big chainring and a small rear cluster.

It is virtually impossible to achieve such a speed unassisted unless it is a steep descent or you are riding an aero racing bike and are a world class pro.

Bike Calculator

Useful calculators for estimating your speed on a bicycle velocity from various parameters.

bikecalculator.com

You need 1000 W total on the flat on a flat bar bike to achieve 34 mph.

Go girl! Hoping Surron is next.

Amen to that!

 

[Mr. Coffee]

... From my experience living in hilly country (and I'm pretty darn fit for 70+), 240 watts would not be enough power -- unless it's an incredibly light ebike.

What matters for power output is the total weight of bike and rider and cargo.

Also, I am a moderately fit cyclist and have hooked myself up to a power meter and I am hard pressed to sustain 250 watts for more than about ninety minutes. Most acoustic cyclists I see here are less fit and I doubt they manage anywhere near that. Yet I manage to go up long, ugly hills nearly every day I ride. And I see lots of those less fit cyclists doing the same damned thing. So no, I do not buy that you need more than 250 watts because you are riding up hills.

When I ride my Bosch-equipped 2018 e-bike (no throttle either) I regularly brap up long hills (10-15km uphills) at about 15-20kph. Which is plenty fast and about as fast as I can avoid potholes and boulders.

What you need with low power is proper gearing and patience. We'd do better as a people if we learned to slow the f**k down and practice patience.

 

[PedalUma]

I am in the industry. People want to buy and ride bikes that can be modified to go over 20 mph with a throttle. This includes lovely cargo moms and little old ladies. And a huge loop hole are ghost pedal bikes with hub drives. You can chop off the thumb throttle on these and pretend to pedal with no effort and they will do 28. We will only deliver bikes that are compliant. If it gets into the hands of a hacker that is their problem. The biggest impact will be when there is an accident involving an illegal bike, insurance will not need to pay out and there will be no one to sue except the person riding an illegal bike in public. With Revv1 bikes for example, a user with a large private desert ranch can go to the manufacture's website, digitally sign a liability waver and get a code to unlock the bike for off road mode. On just about any display anyone can hold two or three buttons for 8-14 seconds and get into the speed settings menu. The stated intent is so bikes can be set to meet local regulations. Nantucket has speed limit for all bikes of 20 mph.

 

[m@Robertson]

It is the issue for you, American e-bike builders who can only use the Chinese crap for your builds. And of course thousands brands of stamped illegal Chinese "e-bikes" sold in the U.S.

Specialized ebikes that are 250w rated have been dyno'd to exceed 750w total output (One test by a Specialized owner for a Luna Cycles Youtube event comes to mind). Reportedly Specialized threatened to sue the company that posted the dyno run. This was many years ago so I seriously doubt they have de-tuned them. Your precious name brands are also vulnerable.

A user of a legal production e-bike does not even know what a "controller" is, where it is located, and they never use a multimetre

The same goes for legislators. And regulators, including your side of the pond.

It is virtually impossible to achieve such a speed unassisted unless it is a steep descent or you are riding an aero racing bike and are a world class pro.

Well, besides the fact that your observation is completely irrelevant to the discussion...
Its not impossible. I was once clocked at a steady, sustained 34 mph over a couple of miles. Of course, it was a road bike, the time was the late 1980's-early 1990's so I was about 40 years younger and ... about 100 lbs lighter, but I commuted every day, pedaled hard then and I can still do so now. Probably still harder than most. And I never said I was unassisted. I said I was pedaling furiously (on a bike geared to pedal with strong physical effort at those speeds, which is something a mere ebike buyer who writes a check and rides what he's been told he should can't do).

Things are different here. A 30 mph bike on an empty bike lane on a city street with a 50 mph speed limit is a bit less common where you live, so I'll forgive your oft-repeated lack of comprehension (bike lane is on the right. Shared-use path with 20 mph speed limit is further right off the road).

Bike Calculator

Useful calculators for estimating your speed on a bicycle velocity from various parameters.

bikecalculator.com

You need 1000 W total on the flat on a flat bar bike to achieve 34 mph.

You rely on electronic crutches too much. Just ride. Also, having watched the real time (calibrated) output at that speed (while actually riding, not sitting and opining on a computer), 1000w doesn't hold up to reality. Climbing to that speed, yes it does. Once you are at cruise it is dramatically less.

 

[m@Robertson]

What you need with low power is proper gearing and patience. We'd do better as a people if we learned to slow the f**k down and practice patience.

Try out that attitude with the car driving public and see how far it goes. If someone is using a car (or a bike) for routine transportation, time to complete the task (of which the ride is just a means to and end and not an end in itself) and convenience are crucial. If you are merely engaging in recreation, then yeah sure slow down and enjoy the scenery.

But when the bike is not a toy and its job is to get you places so you can perform routine daily tasks, things are different. A real-world example: I ride my bike to do my business banking and post office runs during my work day. And get back to the office in time to continue my job. If I can't do this in a timely fashion, I have to drive. Being able to go faster means one less car on the road.

This misconception is probably the most insidious when it comes to preventing cycling from displacing the automobile. Riders ascribe virtue to effort. They ignore the value of time and convenience, or even worse denigrate those things. And so they help cement the automobile in its place through their efforts.

 

[jabberwocky]

Its not impossible. I was once clocked at a steady, sustained 34 mph over a couple of miles. Of course, it was a road bike, the time was the late 1980's-early 1990's so I was about 40 years younger and ... about 100 lbs lighter, but I commuted every day, pedaled hard then and I can still do so now. Probably still harder than most. And I never said I was unassisted. I said I was pedaling furiously (on a bike geared to pedal with strong physical effort at those speeds, which is something a mere ebike buyer who writes a check and rides what he's been told he should can't do).

Dunno man, 30mph is extremely fast unassisted without a downhill or massive tailwind. Its doable, for short distances, by very fit cyclists, but absolutely nobody is sustaining that for long. We don't need to resort to online calculators to figure out whats normal for humans, we can just look at what professional cyclists maintain. World tour professional cyclists in a pack are averaging mid 20s on flat stages, and maybe 30mph during short time trials. The current hour world record is ~35mph. So the worlds fittest time trialist under absolutely ideal conditions on an aero bike setup specifically for average speed over an hour can average 35mph for that hour.

If you averaged 34mph on flat terrain for a few miles in the real world, well, it sounds like you should have been doing professional time trials or something. Thats very, very fast.

Try out that attitude with the car driving public and see how far it goes. If someone is using a car (or a bike) for routine transportation, time to complete the task (of which the ride is just a means to and end and not an end in itself) and convenience are crucial. If you are merely engaging in recreation, then yeah sure slow down and enjoy the scenery.

But when the bike is not a toy and its job is to get you places so you can perform routine daily tasks, things are different. A real-world example: I ride my bike to do my business banking and post office runs during my work day. And get back to the office in time to continue my job. If I can't do this in a timely fashion, I have to drive. Being able to go faster means one less car on the road.

This misconception is probably the most insidious when it comes to preventing cycling from displacing the automobile. Riders ascribe virtue to effort. They ignore the value of time and convenience, or even worse denigrate those things. And so they help cement the automobile in its place through their efforts.

This is all well and good, but we have always had a perfectly legal way to ride two wheel bikes without power or speed limits. They are called motorcycles. You just have to meet safety standards, register and insure them and can't ride them in bike lanes and such. I get that everyone wants to spend less time commuting, but I also get that pedestrians, runners, cyclists etc don't particularly want to share their off-road infrastructure with motor vehicles. In fact, that infrastructure was built specifically so they had a place to walk/ride without having to deal with motor vehicles. Surely you understand that retorting "but I have s*it to do and need to go fast" doesn't assuage those concerns.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

I'd like to see an accurate readout of that bike at maximum power. From my experience living in hilly country (and I'm pretty darn fit for 70+), 240 watts would not be enough power -- unless it's an incredibly light ebike.

Had the same reservation about 240W, but it turns out be more than enough for this 76 year old with bird legs on a 38 lb mid-drive in hilly terrain.

Hard to quantify how hilly, but it's easy to rack up 1,000 ft of elevation gain on a 10 mi ride from home here — mostly on moderate to steep hills under a mile long. Pitches of 8-15% are pretty common, but they're seldom longer than a quarter mile.

I ride this topography on a 38 lb Vado SL with the 240W mid-drive motor @Stefan Mikes mentioned. Had to reduce the chainring from 44t to 40t to match my cadence to the motor's sweet spot. But after 900+ mi and nearly 43,000 ft of elevation gain with that one mod, I can honestly say that 240W is plenty here — provided you're willing to climb the toughest hills at 6 mph.

How strong a rider do you have to be to pull this off? I'm not all that strong, but I can sustain 150-200W long enough to climb any hill here. Rarely have to resort to the SL's highest assist level and usually climb in the lowest.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

You rely on electronic crutches too much. Just ride. Also, having watched the real time (calibrated) output at that speed (while actually riding, not sitting and opining on a computer), 1000w doesn't hold up to reality. Climbing to that speed, yes it does. Once you are at cruise it is dramatically less.

Air drag is a physical phenomenon with all the maths behind it. You cannot deny the law of physics. And now it is clear to me how illegal e-bikes you are riding.