Throttles and California

[Mr. Coffee]

Americans have asked for that themselves. "Need for Speed", "Fast and Furious", 'I will ride my e-bike responsibly", 'On my private property only', 'Throttle is a must' isn't it?
I don't want bash Uma as he changed himself for good a little but not long ago he was "smoking Vados" with his own contraptions.

Please don't paint all of us with one brush here. There are over 330 million people in this country. There are likely more people in this country who'd agree with you than there are in Poland.

To me this is One More Example of where people are marketed and socialized to "want" things that are ultimately very bad for them. Like cigarettes or high fructose corn syrup. I've often wondered, if you have to be told you need something, do you really need it?

 

[J.R.]

I've been ebiking for more than 10 years. 10 years ago, there were rational conversations on this site about power and speed, just like today. At the time I was commuting 34 miles a day, 12 months a year in cold Pennsylvania. My last year on a conventional bike, I rode about 2000 miles. Rarely below freezing or in snow. My first ebike year I rode more than 6000 miles. As for cold and snow? See my avatar photo from the first day of spring 2015.

The last 2 miles of my commute was 830-foot elevation gain. Ebikes were a game changer for me. It was more than a year before I saw another ebike. We were completely under the radar 10 years ago. The bike in that photo was the most powerful ebike I have ever owned. 500 watts, peaked at around 750 watts. 20 MPH max speed (it you really pedaled hard). On that 830 foot hill; the last 200 yards is 18% grade. I could maintain 9 to 11 MPH on warm days, 6 or 7 MPH in winter.

On a conventional bike I would average 11-1/2 MPH on that 34-mile commute. On that ebike I averaged just over 14 MPH. I don't make that commute anymore.

I ride with other ebikers and we talk about this speed and power issue. First I'd like to say, nearly everyone I know started with a throttle class 2, and the vast majority of them moved on to a class 1 or class 3 bike without a throttle. Nobody I have met and discussed throttles, misses the throttle. That includes me. But I also don't really care if you have a throttle on a true Class 2. In most of the conversations I have had with people, they are fine with a 20 MPH limit.

10 years ago I thought EU restrictions were too harsh. Now I think they got it mostly right. That said, I do think US commuters travel much farther than Europeans and 20 MPH is far more rational than 15.5 MPH the EU has. Unfortunately, the EU is starting to have problems with high power electric motorbikes. The only way to stop these bikes is to somehow stop it at the source and prevent them from entering the country.

I offer this background to ask a serious question. Or rather a series of questions. Would you still ebike if you were limited to 20 MPH? Would you ebike without a throttle? Would you ebike if limited to less than 500 watts. In other words, if the hand of god, or the hand of government converted your ebike to any or all of these limits, would you still ride it?

I would without question, because ebikes are a game changer. I already ride with all of these limits.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Please don't paint all of us with one brush here.

That's correct! There are many fine cyclists on the Forums, and that is the reason I'm still here.

 

[PedalUma]

I've been ebiking for more than 10 years. 10 years ago, there were rational conversations on this site about power and speed, just like today. At the time I was commuting 34 miles a day, 12 months a year in cold Pennsylvania. My last year on a conventional bike, I rode about 2000 miles. Rarely below freezing or in snow. My first ebike year I rode more than 6000 miles. As for cold and snow? See my avatar photo from the first day of spring 2015.

The last 2 miles of my commute was 830-foot elevation gain. Ebikes were a game changer for me. It was more than a year before I saw another ebike. We were completely under the radar 10 years ago. The bike in that photo was the most powerful ebike I have ever owned. 500 watts, peaked at around 750 watts. 20 MPH max speed (it you really pedaled hard). On that 830 foot hill; the last 200 yards is 18% grade. I could maintain 9 to 11 MPH on warm days, 6 or 7 MPH in winter.

On a conventional bike I would average 11-1/2 MPH on that 34-mile commute. On that ebike I averaged just over 14 MPH. I don't make that commute anymore.

I ride with other ebikers and we talk about this speed and power issue. First I'd like to say, nearly everyone I know started with a throttle class 2, and the vast majority of them moved on to a class 1 or class 3 bike without a throttle. Nobody I have met and discussed throttles, misses the throttle. That includes me. But I also don't really care if you have a throttle on a true Class 2. In most of the conversations I have had with people, they are fine with a 20 MPH limit.

10 years ago I thought EU restrictions were too harsh. Now I think they got it mostly right. That said, I do think US commuters travel much farther than Europeans and 20 MPH is far more rational than 15.5 MPH the EU has. Unfortunately, the EU is starting to have problems with high power electric motorbikes. The only way to stop these bikes is to somehow stop it at the source and prevent them from entering the country.

I offer this background to ask a serious question. Or rather a series of questions. Would you still ebike if you were limited to 20 MPH? Would you ebike without a throttle? Would you ebike if limited to less than 500 watts. In other words, if the hand of god, or the hand of government converted your ebike to any or all of these limits, would you still ride it?

I would without question, because ebikes are a game changer. I already ride with all of these limits.

I rode chili relleno for a second day in a row to the coast. Yes, I would do it. But at times in the open country, I was doing 26 mph today on flats once the fog lifted. It felt natural. Amish carbon bikes do that. Why not an older guy on a Vado? We call Chielo Valley, chili relleno. It is one of the most lovely rides in the world. Millions of birds were stocking up for migration. The verdant hills were so beautiful and daffodils were blooming.

 

[DashRiprock]

10 years ago I thought EU restrictions were too harsh. Now I think they got it mostly right. That said, I do think US commuters travel much farther than Europeans and 20 MPH is far more rational than 15.5 MPH the EU has. Unfortunately, the EU is starting to have problems with high power electric motorbikes. The only way to stop these bikes is to somehow stop it at the source and prevent them from entering the country.

In other words, be subjugated by your own government (see the 'Domari Nolo' flag in my signature) all the way up to and including the manner in which you swing a leg over to enjoy it.

I offer this background to ask a serious question. Or rather a series of questions. Would you still ebike if you were limited to 20 MPH? Would you ebike without a throttle? Would you ebike if limited to less than 500 watts. In other words, if the hand of god, or the hand of government converted your ebike to any or all of these limits, would you still ride it?
I would without question, because ebikes are a game changer. I already ride with all of these limits.

Which is truly the call of our modern day lib elitists presently in power and screwing up entire continents of the (barely hanging on) free world:
"...I... am both physically and mentally capable of accomplishing anything in my present state and more often than not possess the monetary means to have somebody simply drive me around when I do not (slave-like human-power only of course!) so that I may continue to enjoy the many freedoms that only the 'fit' should (obviously) ever enjoy...".

It's the same 'government knows best' b.s. that put us in the mess that we are in now with the 3-wheeled motor:
Greatest budget-friendly workhorse in the history of man.
So what do we allow our all-knowning and indispensable 'oversee(ers)' to do?...ban the very machine which soon becomes (literally) the only workhorse means of transportation that 21st century average freedom lovers would ever be able to afford due to regulation-laden lib policy making.

ironic, huh(?).

 

[jabberwocky]

Those are certainly words.

 

[Mr. Coffee]

The deal, as defined in 2002, was that e-bikes would be regulated as bicycles as long as they stayed within certain power and speed ranges. Manufacturers and consumers have broken that deal so it is reasonable to expect that e-bikes will be regulated as motor vehicles now.

The days of the Wild West are over.

Even in China the rules are changing.

In September 2024, the Chinese government proposed stricter regulations for electric bicycles (e-bikes) to improve safety and regulate the growing e-bike industry. The proposed regulations include:

• Speed: The maximum designed speed for e-bikes is capped at 25 kilometers per hour
  
  
• Fire retardancy: Non-metallic materials used in e-bikes must meet stricter flame resistance requirements
  
  
• Plastic components: The use of plastic components in e-bikes is limited
  
  
• Real-time communication: E-bikes will be equipped with real-time communication
  
  
• Beidou satellite positioning: E-bikes will be equipped with Beidou satellite positioning
  
  
• Interoperable components: Controllers, batteries, and chargers must be "interoperable" to make it harder to tamper with them
  
  
• Braking distance: Tightened requirements for braking distance
  

Other recent regulations for e-bikes in China include:

• A government-approved list offering preferential policies to qualified e-bike manufacturers
• New safety requirements for lithium batteries used in e-bikes
• A trade-in policy for e-bikes that offers subsidies to encourage consumers to exchange old lithium-ion e-bikes for safer lead-acid battery models

 

[m@Robertson]

The deal, as defined in 2002, was that e-bikes would be regulated as bicycles as long as they stayed within certain power and speed ranges. Manufacturers and consumers have broken that deal so it is reasonable to expect that e-bikes will be regulated as motor vehicles now.

OR the perceived usefulness of ebikes has grown beyond what was originally intended or even known at the time of initial legislation, such that the definition of what an ebike is needs to grow with it. In 2002 cargo bikes did not exist. The concept of them didn't exist, either. But even more than that: The concept of using an ebike as daily transportation and as an auto replacement was not considered realistic. These things have all changed dramatically.

There needs to be an understanding that power /= speed. We see that mistake being made here in this thread, so if a group of ebike riders don't get it, legislators certainly won't without a kick in the ass from the public, which is where I think this is going since the legislation is a clear - and gigantic - over-reach without a grandfather clause.

Also, the Super73 lawsuit, which by all accounts is a slam dunk loser for Super73, is going to play a big role. I suspect they are desperate to settle it with a confidential payout. If they have to refund everyone who claims they were fooled by deceptive marketing, thats going to kill them dead (and the pissed-off parent was made so by a simple school requirement to register an ebike for locking it up on campus... and their refusal to do so for a Super73). Once this is done to one seller, its possible to do to others. We saw the ebike landscape change with the Rad lawsuit, which caused manufacturers to switch to hydraulic brakes almost overnight.

 

[jabberwocky]

Mr Coffee nailed it.

There needs to be an understanding that power /= speed. We see that mistake being made here in this thread, so if a group of ebike riders don't get it, legislators certainly won't without a kick in the ass from the public, which is where I think this is going since the legislation is a clear - and gigantic - over-reach without a grandfather clause.

The problem is that for every grandma who wants a big power bike to carry groceries better, theres 1000 people who want the big power bike to ride 30+mph in bike lanes and on sidewalks. Sucks, but the reality is that the legal landscape is going to focus on the latter and not cater to the former because thats just the reality out there.

The only way to fix it is to invent a time machine, go back 5 years or so and be more outspoken about companies selling e-motos as ebikes and pushing for better oversight of that so it doesn't become the problem it has. Ebike advocates did not. And here we are.

Also, the Super73 lawsuit, which by all accounts is a slam dunk loser for Super73, is going to play a big role. I suspect they are desperate to settle it with a confidential payout. If they have to refund everyone who claims they were fooled by deceptive marketing, thats going to kill them dead (and the pissed-off parent was made so by a simple school requirement to register an ebike for locking it up on campus... and their refusal to do so for a Super73). Once this is done to one seller, its possible to do to others. We saw the ebike landscape change with the Rad lawsuit, which caused manufacturers to switch to hydraulic brakes almost overnight.

It sucks, but its also really difficult to feel an ounce of sympathy for Super73. They absolutely knew they were selling bikes that ignored the rules, they knew that pretty much 100% of their customers were immediately unlocking them to throttle at high speeds, and they didn't care.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

These observations in my hilly part of coastal SoCal bear repeating:

1. This place is crawling with ebikes ridden mostly by school kids but also by a fair number of adults.

2. Across all ages, most of the ebikes appear to be used primarily for transportation. Our climate and bike infrastructure favor this kind of car replacement.

3. Ebikes have gotten many parents totally out of the school and activity transport biz. Imagine how pleased they'll be to find themselves back in the dropoff and pickup lines.

4. Without ebikes — and I dare say without throttles — our substantial hills would have put the kabosh on nearly all of this car replacement.

5. Recreational and fitness riding are minority uses here now.

6. The great majority of bikes spotted in the wild here are ebikes now — probably by at least 5 to 1.

7. Most of the exceptions to #6 have roadies in lycra in the saddle.

As @m@Robertson keeps pointing out for coastal central California, SB 1271 is going to run into a lot of trouble here. Will be very interesting to see how it all plays out.

Getting involved
My state assemblyperson's a big ebike and micromobility supporter. Just to get the trouble rolling here, talked to a thoughtful staffer in her office yesterday to give them a heads-up on the many unintended consequences that would ensue if SB 1271 were fully enforced as signed.

Plan to keep bugging them till the law's fixed. Ditto for my other state representatives.

Being a goodwill ambassador for ebikes out in public is also key — and that's something all of us should be doing every chance we get. Ditto for modeling sustainable ebike behavior. That means safety first and courtesy and respect for all fellow road, path, and trail users.

 

[m@Robertson]

The problem is that for every grandma who wants a big power bike to carry groceries better, theres 1000 people who want the big power bike to ride 30+mph in bike lanes and on sidewalks. Sucks, but the reality is that the legal landscape is going to focus on the latter and not cater to the former because thats just the reality out there.

I don't see that argument being allowed to kill off the cargo bike industry, and utility biking in general. Using ebikes to reduce auto usage, reduce congstion etc. is such a near/dear goal to progressive politicians that I think they will be very susceptible to some form of accommodation. All the talk of 'I can climb a 20% grade with 250w is not going to fly, as ordinary people drive this kind of segment; not cyclists. And ordinary registered voters (not to mention the industry that sells the bikes) are not going to take this lying down.

I think the best long term solution (which since the word 'best' is used means it won't happen) is another ebike class. Including a speed limit and much less restrictive power limit along the lines of the EU's speed pedelec limit which is IIRC about 1500w. To address the larger-size-on-paths issue, a lower speed limit on paths. Right now its reduced to 20 mph in the generic class system, but my municipality has had a 12 mph limit in place on the most crowded sections and it has worked well.

Actually since it the easy way out, I think it likely this is the way this problem is going to go:

1. A grandfather clause will be introduced so as to not render illegal formerly compliant ebikes (numbering in the hundreds of thousands).
2. The Super73's of the world are going to be hit with government enforcement
3. School districts will continue with a practice now in its infancy, which ios to inspect and register on-campus ebikes. This in turn will (and already has) result in lawsuits that threaten the existence of the manufacturer.

Worth mentioning: Go to Super 73's web site and just look at how they are portraying their bikes today versus the recent past. Look at their product lineup. You can see the effect of that lawsuit already.

The only way to fix it is to invent a time machine, go back 5 years or so and be more outspoken about companies selling e-motos as ebikes and pushing for better oversight of that so it doesn't become the problem it has. Ebike advocates did not. And here we are.

I don't think so. The toothpaste is already out of the tube. There are a LOT of registered voters who bought bikes in good faith who are not going to get screwed like this without complaint. Besides... thinking that vocal activism could deter commerce and a popular product is, I think, unrealistic at best.

It sucks, but its also really difficult to feel an ounce of sympathy for Super73. They absolutely knew they were selling bikes that ignored the rules, they knew that pretty much 100% of their customers were immediately unlocking them to throttle at high speeds, and they didn't care.

I have no sympathy whatsoever for them myself. They played the game and now its time to pay for it. Frankly I would not be surprised if they folded their tent up pretty quickly.

 

[m@Robertson]

5. Recreational and fitness riding are minority uses here now.
6. The great majority of bikes spotted in the wild here are ebikes now — probably by at least 5 to 1.

I think thats a key observation here: Traditional cyclists and normies riding analog bikes are already gone. ALL of the tourist rentals are ebikes - Rads, Aventons and Lectrics so none of them are high-powered but now all of them are illegal. Speaking of which, this means all ebike businesses are operating illegally at the stroke of a pen.

Thinking the objectors to this law are just going to be a few bike riders is a mistake. I think in part that comes from a mindset that has been true in the USA up until recently: Only a few weird adults ride bikes. The normal grownups drive. The market has been growing enough over enough time that we MAY be at a point where, as I already said, the toothpaste is out of the tube.

Just look at how well NY's ebike ban went, and how long it lasted.

 

[jabberwocky]

I don't see that argument being allowed to kill off the cargo bike industry, and utility biking in general. Using ebikes to reduce auto usage, reduce congstion etc. is such a near/dear goal to progressive politicians that I think they will be very susceptible to some form of accommodation. All the talk of 'I can climb a 20% grade with 250w is not going to fly, as ordinary people drive this kind of segment; not cyclists. And ordinary registered voters (not to mention the industry that sells the bikes) are not going to take this lying down.

The thing is, ebikes may be increasingly popular for alternative transportation (i.e. everything that isn't a motor vehicle) but that entire category is small potatoes compared to the general population of commuters. If the plan to battle this is a groundswell of regular voters, I think you'll be disappointed. Even in Cali.

I think the best long term solution (which since the word 'best' is used means it won't happen) is another ebike class. Including a speed limit and much less restrictive power limit along the lines of the EU's speed pedelec limit which is IIRC about 1500w. To address the larger-size-on-paths issue, a lower speed limit on paths. Right now its reduced to 20 mph in the generic class system, but my municipality has had a 12 mph limit in place on the most crowded sections and it has worked well.

Ebike advocates/manufacturers of such bikes are welcome to advocate for this. At least its more honest than pretending that some of these bikes are legal ebikes.

Speed limits on paths work as well as they do on roads (so, just short of useless). If some sort of class 4 / light emoto / whatever class was brought into being, I would push hard to not allow them on any non-motorized infra. If you want to ride ebikes on MUPs and sidewalks and bike paths, buy a class 1/2/3. I have a class 3 and consider it really the upper end of whats safe on paths anyway.

1. A grandfather clause will be introduced so as to not render illegal formerly compliant ebikes (numbering in the hundreds of thousands).

The argument is that those bikes were never legal in the first place, so theres no grandfathering to be done. 750w peak is iffy for lots of ebikes, but the CPSC definition has always been "an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 h.p.)". Manufacturers liked to interpret that as a continuous power but the law never actually said that.

2. The Super73's of the world are going to be hit with government enforcement
3. School districts will continue with a practice now in its infancy, which ios to inspect and register on-campus ebikes. This in turn will (and already has) result in lawsuits that threaten the existence of the manufacturer.

Agreed. Too bad, so sad.

Worth mentioning: Go to Super 73's web site and just look at how they are portraying their bikes today versus the recent past. Look at their product lineup. You can see the effect of that lawsuit already.

Everyone in that category (up to Luna with the Surron) have been toning down their descriptions for years. Lots of bikes circa 2020 had "legal ebike as shipped, but a simple software setting unlocks OFF ROAD MODE with thousands of watts and speeds of 35mph+!!" type descriptions. Now a lot of that is much more wishy washy. But the bikes haven't really changed, they are just more vague in the marketing.

 

[Mr. Coffee]

OR the perceived usefulness of ebikes has grown beyond what was originally intended or even known at the time of initial legislation, such that the definition of what an ebike is needs to grow with it. In 2002 cargo bikes did not exist. The concept of them didn't exist, either. But even more than that: The concept of using an ebike as daily transportation and as an auto replacement was not considered realistic. These things have all changed dramatically.

I agree, but that is an argument for negotiating a new deal, not for just pretending there is no deal and letting any idea, no matter how idiotic, bloom.

My opinions about micromobility and the opportunities that e-bikes represent for our society are pretty close to your own. But I am not optimistic that we'll end up in a good place. Bluntly unrestricted e-bikes, and in particular monstrosities like Surrons and Super 73s, are toxic PR for e-bikes.

I go to a fair number of public meetings where trail access and policy are discussed. When the subject of allowing e-bikes comes up the conversation is usually something like this:

Q: So should we consider permitting e-bikes on certain trails?

COMMENTER: (Shows a picture of a Super 73). You mean an e-bike like this?

EVERYONE: OH HELL NO!

I wish more people on this forum attended such public meetings and got some perspective on how their activity is viewed by others using the same infrastructure. Although until we learn to be better advocates for our own activity, I wouldn't recommend speaking too loudly, as many e-bike fans are really good at alienating other trail users in public forums.

 

[J.R.]

In other words, be subjugated by your own government (see the 'Domari Nolo' flag in my signature) all the way up to and including the manner in which you swing a leg over to enjoy it.

I used the words I wanted to. No other words.

Which is truly the call of our modern day lib elitists presently in power and screwing up entire continents of the (barely hanging on) free world:
"...I... am both physically and mentally capable of accomplishing anything in my present state and more often than not possess the monetary means to have somebody simply drive me around when I do not (slave-like human-power only of course!) so that I may continue to enjoy the many freedoms that only the 'fit' should (obviously) ever enjoy...".

It's the same 'government knows best' b.s. that put us in the mess that we are in now with the 3-wheeled motor:
Greatest budget-friendly workhorse in the history of man.
So what do we allow our all-knowning and indispensable 'oversee(ers)' to do?...ban the very machine which soon becomes (literally) the only workhorse means of transportation that 21st century average freedom lovers would ever be able to afford due to regulation-laden lib policy making.

ironic, huh(?).

You don't know me and you make far too many assumptions.

Your rights end where other's rights begin. I spent years working for access. Other users of these public spaces have valid opinions and concerns. There has to be rules for how public land is to be used. The very worst thing any of us can do is ignore laws, regulations and the people in our communities. If you don't like the rules, get involved to change them.

Far too many people don't have a clue how much work and time mountain bikers and road cyclists put in to get the infrastructure we have. Then ebikers rode their coattails. Some ebikers got involved and contributed to the cause of acceptance. Standards were set by local and state governments. Many of these entities are willing to work with us, but we have to engage. Then we get motorbikes riding the coattails of MTBs, cyclists and ebikers, without any work or engagement. A result of our narcissistic society.

 

[jabberwocky]

The solution I'd like to see is to just force companies to lock down the bikes more. Bosch/Yamaha/Shimano/Etc all manage it fine. None of this "its sold with a legal limit but 20 seconds in a menu turns all that off" crap. If the bike is easily changed to ride outside class 1/2/3, company is fined and ordered to recall.

If you want to sell an e-moto, it has to be marketed as such and meet DOT standards for dirt bikes/road motorcycles/whatever.

Bluntly e-bikes, and in particular monstrosities like Surrons and Super 73s, are toxic PR for e-bikes.

...


I wish more people on this forum attended such public meetings and got some perspective on how their activity is viewed by others using the same infrastructure. Although until we learn to be better advocates for our own activity, I wouldn't recommend speaking too loudly, as many e-bike fans are really good at alienating other trail users in public forums.

This, a thousand freaking times.

Far too many people don't have a clue how much work and time mountain bikers and road cyclists put in to get the infrastructure we have. Then ebikers rode their coattails. Some ebikers got involved and contributed to the cause of acceptance. Standards were set by local and state governments. Many of these entities are willing to work with us, but we have to engage. Then we get motorbikes riding the coattails of MTBs, cyclists and ebikers, without any work or engagement. A result of our narcissistic society.

And this, also a thousand freaking times.

 

[PedalUma]

We insist that every young person who is being gifted a bike take this course before their parents allow them to ride. If they are seen by a neighbor being unsafe, the bike goes away. Riding a bike is so much better than isolated social media. So, the phone goes away too. On every page of Super 73 it says, not for those under 16. RAD Power has it imbedded under clearcoat on each frame. That San Anselmo kid was sent home, that is when he did something unsafe and got busted by the police. The mom does not want to be responsible as a parent. She wants to pass the blame and it will not stick. Parents need to act like parents. It is so Marin.

Bicycle Safety Course​

The CHP has created a Bicycle Safety Course which holds valuable information related to bicycle safety and maintenance. The course is available for anyone to complete, but if you happened to be caught not wearing your helmet and received a citation, you must complete the course within 120 days of receiving the citation. Once you have completed the course, bring your citation, a properly fitted helmet and a copy of the course completion certificate to your local CHP office to have the citation cleared.
Link to course

 

[m@Robertson]

If some sort of class 4 / light emoto / whatever class was brought into being, I would push hard to not allow them on any non-motorized infra.

In a location like mine, there is no alternative. We have a military base that closes off traffic from one side of town to another, creating a choke point where the only way thru that is not a MUP is a narrow underground tunnel with two lanes and high speeds. Since equal access is a thing, there are going to have to be some concessions. Especially since a 15-20 mph ebike is not safe to ride on many roads.

The argument is that those bikes were never legal in the first place, so theres no grandfathering to be done. 750w peak is iffy for lots of ebikes, but the CPSC definition has always been "an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 h.p.)". Manufacturers liked to interpret that as a continuous power but the law never actually said that.

That only holds water in the never-ending world of internet forum arguments. To try and use that to scrap ebikes by the tens of thousands is in my opinion (worth what you paid for it) nonsense. We're going to see over time how this works out in the real world. How it goes on off road recreational trails is I think going to be totally different from how it plays out on urban MUP's.

If I had to guess, based on what I little I have heard so far from the local policymaker side of this, thats where the enforcement is going to happen and it won't go any further. The common sense arguments @Jeremy McCreary brought up are going to temper this to a standard of reality rather than zealotry.

 

[jabberwocky]

That only holds water in the never-ending world of internet forum arguments. To try and use that to scrap ebikes by the tens of thousands is in my opinion (worth what you paid for it) nonsense. We're going to see over time how this works out in the real world. How it goes on off road recreational trails is I think going to be totally different from how it plays out on urban MUP's.

If I had to guess, based on what I little I have heard so far from the local policymaker side of this, thats where the enforcement is going to happen and it won't go any further. The common sense arguments @Jeremy McCreary brought up are going to temper this to a standard of reality rather than zealotry.

I commented earlier in the thread that its probably mainly a bludgeon to use against the worst manufacturers (head off any argument about "software can be set to 20mph therefor its a class 2" from people selling several thousand watt emotos). I would be extremely surprised if any enforcement involved going after existing owners except in the most egregious cases. Its not like police departments really have the resources to do much enforcement in most locales.

I would guess the main forum this law is intended for is the courts. Making the sale of wildly non-compliant bikes a huge legal risk is a much easier way to address the problem than stationing cops at every trailhead.

 

[DashRiprock]

I used the words I wanted to. No other words.

It's called a reply begging your confirmation. This was a phrase used long before (mostly young people now) were instantly offended before an exchange ever begins (see above).

You don't know me and you make far too many assumptions.

Again, the whine before any follow-up 'opine' ever begins. You're obviously far too young to remember simple straight talk and straight responses.

Your rights end where other's rights begin.

Gosh do I ever wish that you were around to say that 50 years ago for my own entertainment.

I spent years working for access.

Access to what? I spent years working for access to public lands involving machines that absolutely tore the crap out of everything if not properly maintained. Still feel good about it and always will.

Other users of these public spaces have valid opinions and concerns.

Your definition of 'others' does not include 'all' nor certainly everyone being allowed to use the same public space. Therein lies your probelm with...dare I say it(?)..inclusion.

There has to be rules for how public land is to be used.

If you open it up for one, you open it up for everyone. The sick, disabled, able...everyone. It should not be used if it cannot used by....wait for it...everyone.

The very worst thing any of us can do is ignore laws, regulations and the people in our communities.

You like to make laws and regulations which ignore large swaths of individuals and their access to large areas of land that we ALL pay taxes to maintain (see above). You're digging yourself in even further...

If you don't like the rules, get involved to change them.

If you don't like access for all in a maintained atmosphere...YOU change the rules to keep us all out. We already own the place (earth) and desire to use it together.

Far too many people don't have a clue how much work and time mountain bikers and road cyclists put in to get the infrastructure we have.

The groups you just named arena different than any other exclusive bunch desiring a trail exclusively for themselves 24/7/365. That would be great if there were an infinite number of identically beautiful spaces in this country. There are not...and wait for it again...we all have to very simply share (period).

Then ebikers rode their coattails.

This is the same self-righteous crap that single-track motorcyclists long ago attempted to (and still do) blow up everyone's rear ends regarding 'their trails'. Tree hugging leftists in government positions of power or not 'ideally' want absolutely EVERYONE flat out of the most beautiful areas that this country has to offer. If they can hold that vast opposing number of those wishing to enjoy God's handiwork down to a relatively few number of two-wheelers and rock climbers trying to break their neck every now and then...mission accomplished.

Some ebikers got involved and contributed to the cause of acceptance.

Why did these ebikers ever feel the need to be "accepted" by anyone let alone join a "cause" or have their own?

Standards were set by local and state governments. Many of these entities are willing to work with us, but we have to engage. Then we get motorbikes riding the coattails of MTBs, cyclists and ebikers, without any work or engagement. A result of our narcissistic society.

LOL!!!!
Do you sincerely believe that motorcyclists somehow came *AFTER* anyone fighting for two wheeled access in American outdoor recreation...since when(???)
I am not a big fan of the American Motorcycle Association due to far too much arrogance exhibited pretty much since the introduction of the ATC...yet "...them's fightin' words..." with those guys (believe me).

To keep on topic:
If you're against throttles in California then you're probably hoping to drive everyone else out so as to have the whole place to yourself.
The good news (for you at least) is that most freedom loving folks can't get out of there fast enough.