De restrict for off road use

[sjpt]

Indeed, its possible of course that 'Police Scotland' found something about the bike that required the rider to have had a licence and insurance, so a serious offence maybe.

Even though, as pointed out many times above in this thread, 30kph is only a small amount over the legal limit, it is above it. Any e-bike that can manage that while providing assistance is not technically a pedalec, and so requires license, insurance etc.

Many people have posted many times on this forum words to the effect you'll probably get away with it, but if for any reason the police do take notice you are technically liable for several fairly serious offences. This one didn't get away with it. It does seem a shame though, given how many blatant offenders (wavy sounds here) do get away with it. I still suspect there is a lot more behind it that doesn't show in the article; maybe a history of reckless riding, or maybe the rider had recently stolen the policeman's girlfriend (or worse, manfriend).

 

[saneagle]

Even though, as pointed out many times above in this thread, 30kph is only a small amount over the legal limit, it is above it. Any e-bike that can manage that while providing assistance is not technically a pedalec, and so requires license, insurance etc.

How fast did the bike actually go on the road then? Did you test it? The law relates to how fast the bike goes on the road, not what's shown on some Chinese LCD with the wheel in the air.

 

[Tony1951]

How fast did the bike actually go on the road then? Did you test it? The law relates to how fast the bike goes on the road, not what's shown on some Chinese LCD with the wheel in the air.

Well said.

To be fair, I very much doubt that the police would be as petty as to even look twice at a bike that was not being ridden in a dangerous way, or was obviously over-powered. A while ago, I was following two clowns in my car, who were flying uphill at about twenty-five miles an hour without pedaling. They were ripe for the plucking and that's fair enough. I have no fear at all that any policeman is going to interfere with me as I pedal my full throttle e-bike along the road at 15 miles an hour.

Maybe in an area where there is a problem of ebike hooliganism, the police will be on the lookout and could cast a glance at these machines.

As for Guerney being followed - - - It was probably the Anti Smart Meter / Direct Debit, tin foil hat he was wearing. That would make anyone suspicious.

 

[sjpt]

How fast did the bike actually go on the road then? Did you test it? The law relates to how fast the bike goes on the road, not what's shown on some Chinese LCD with the wheel in the air.

Basically, there is so little in the article (and quite possibly a lot of that wrong) that none of us knows the details of the situation, so not worth worrying about too much. I agree the wheel in the air test doesn't prove anything.

According to the article: A cyclist was caught riding a modified electric bike through Glasgow at speeds of more than 30kph. If (a) he wasn't pedalling and (b) it was flat and (c) their speed measurement was reliable then that does indicate a machine that isn't a pedalec, so an s-pedalec or moped being driven illegally. Trouble is, we don't know about (a)(b)(c); we also don't know about 100 other possible details.

 

[guerney]

When my bike was briefly derestricted, and I did a no load speed test with wheel raised off the ground, activated with throttle depressed (mine sounded cheerful), back then when the throttle was still attached, as shown by the orificer in the photo... my speedo showed faster than a paltry 30.2kph! That's pitifully slow. The real crime is the perp buying a crap bike or conversion kit. I pity the fool. Throw the book at him I say - if you're going to do illegal, make a proper job of it! Can't stand half-arsers. This dude's going to get raped in prison showers by former Sur-ron riders.

 

[Az.]

He couldn't have been riding that fast because his motor only assisted to 18.7 mph - 1 mph above the legal maximum.

Where did you take this value from?

 

[saneagle]

Where did you take this value from?

18.7 mph is the speed shown on the LCD. If it could have been higher, they would have shown it. That speed is consistent with a typical 36v 201 rpm hub-motor.

The legal maximum according to EN 15194 is 25 kph plus 10 %, which is 17.1 mph.

 

[Az.]

18.7 mph is the speed shown on the LCD. If it could have been higher, they would have shown it. That speed is consistent with a typical 36v 201 rpm hub-motor.

15.5mph is the legal limit as far as I understand, not 17.7

 

[saneagle]

15.5mph is the legal limit as far as I understand, not 17.7

I indicated 17.1, not 17.7. The bike needs to comply with EN15194 to be legal. 17.08 mph would be a pass 17.09 would be a probable failure.

 

[Az.]

I indicated 17.1, not 17.7. The bike needs to comply with EN15194 to be legal. 17.08 mph would be a pass 17.09 would be a probable failure.

How 17.08mph would be a pass when limit is 15.5?

 

[saneagle]

How 17.08mph would be a pass when limit is 15.5?

15.5 mph is your limit, not what's written in EN15194. If your bike has a certificate of compliance for EN15194, it's legal. You will see that many very expensive mid-drive ebikes assist over 15.5 mph. Do you think that they're illegal?

 

[Az.]

15.5 mph is your limit, not what's written in EN15194. If your bike has a certificate of compliance for EN15194, it's legal.

SW has certificate and a dongle. Is his bike legal?

You will see that many very expensive mid-drive ebikes assist over 15.5 mph. Do you think that they're illegal?

Yes, that is exactly what I think.
As far as I remember law requires motor to stop assisting at 25km/h. There is nothing written there about where wheels should be - on road or in the air. In case of a bike we are talking about, motor clearly keeps assisting to at least 30km/h ergo it is illegal.

As always we need @flecc to clarify

 

[flecc]

How 17.08mph would be a pass when limit is 15.5?

The DfT have confirmed that the usual 10% tolerance allowed on speed limits also applies to the EAPC assist limit.

The strictest interpretation of the original 25kph law plus 10% allows 17.08762 mph.
.

 

[saneagle]

It's the same as throttles and the 250w power limit. People get an idea in their head about what they think the law is or should be instead of studying what it actually is.

 

[Az.]

The DfT have confirmed that the usual 10% tolerance allowed on speed limits also applies to the EAPC limit.

The strictest interpretation of the original 25kph law plus 10% allows 17.08762 mph.
.

I understand it is a tolerance left for inaccuracy of measurement while speed is measured on the road for example by speed cameras. In this case bike clearly knows what is its speed and it keeps assisting anyway. Is it still legal?

 

[flecc]

Is it still legal?

Yes, there is no such set of conditions applied to the tolerance. It can of course be the tolerance for the bike to get it wrong.
.

 

[Az.]

Yes, there is no such set of conditions applied to the tolerance. It can of course be the tolerance for the bike to get it wrong.
.

Thank you for clarification.
I still think it is lame though. If 17.08mph is the legal speed limit it should be clearly written in the law.
Not 15.5mph and wink wink nudge nudge minister said something different.

 

[flecc]

Thank you for clarification.
I still think it is lame though. If 17.08mph is the legal speed limit it should be clearly written in the law.
Not 15.5mph and wink wink nudge nudge minister said something different.

I don't agree. The government quite rightly recognises that perfect accuracy is nigh on an impossibility, so it's unreasonable to expect it of designers, manufacturers, owners, police or even courts, so the 10% is to deal with that human factor intruding, no matter where it occurs. Of course it isn't cumulative, it's just the one 10% for whoever's error.
.

 

[saneagle]

Thank you for clarification.
I still think it is lame though. If 17.08mph is the legal speed limit it should be clearly written in the law.
Not 15.5mph and wink wink nudge nudge minister said something different.

Then you'd need to add a tolerance for accuracy of measurement and you'd be back to where you started, except 1.5 mph higher.

 

[Tony1951]

Dutch Police seem to have a gadget for testing speed under load:



Article here:

Police roadside test to uncover illegal e-bikes | ETA

Dutch police have unveiled a new roadside device for testing whether e-bikes comply with the law. The mobile rolling road test benches can assess whether

www.eta.co.uk

Fine is €250 which is rather more lenient than having your bike taken away.