Will the end of full speed throttles in January 2016 cause a rush to buy.

[flecc]

I'm not sure poor UK e-bike sales can be put down to our bikes operating on the throttle as well as the pedals.

Of course having throttles isn't the reason for much lower UK sales than some pedelec only markets, but on the evidence, doing away with throttles doesn't necessarily cause a drop in sales.
.

 

[shambolic]

Of course having throttles isn't the reason for much lower UK sales than some pedelec only markets, but on the evidence, doing away with throttles doesn't necessarily cause a drop in sales.
.

It may not cause a drop in sales but it will certainly choke certain sales i.e. those to the majority of people who can ride E-bikes with Mobility issues. This is not obvious at the moment because the majority of such people haven't cottoned on to the great freedom and health benefits offered by such bikes. I would imagine there would have been a slow build up, word of mouth, until it reached a tipping point where it became common knowledge. This will not happen amongst this group now. You cannot risk cycling out on a bike and finding for example , the pain is too much to cycle back or your legs have become so weak they don't respond appropriately, or they have stiffened up or are shaking etc. etc. How would you get back without a throttle? The government have slammed the door on this wonderfully beneficial pursuit, for totally arbitrary reasons.

 

[flecc]

It may not cause a drop in sales but it will certainly choke certain sales i.e. those to the majority of people who can ride E-bikes with Mobility issues.

Of course I agree, but that is a tiny sector compared to the overall possible market as countries like The Netherlands and Germany show. Our e-bike market is small because our cycling market is small, nothing to do with whether throttles are allowed or not. When getting an e-bike first occurs to anyone, they don't even known anything about throttles or pedelec.

I would love to see throttles allowed and even a bit more power so that more riders could be empowered, and I argued for it before the law changes. But trying to persuade the authorities that a two wheeler that has to be balanced by the rider is suitable for a mobility use isn't easy. It's not just us after all, the whole of the EU don't have fully acting throttles permitted on pedelecs.
.

 

[trex]

I don't think there will be a rush. At least not until September - October 2016 if and when the full throttle is outlawed.
I guess the police won't be interested in stopping pensioners to check their bikes, ever.
Not here, not in Europe either.

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

I would love to see throttles allowed and even a bit more power so that more riders could be empowered, and I argued for it before the law changes. But trying to persuade the authorities that a two wheeler that has to be balanced by the rider is suitable for a mobility use isn't easy. It's not just us after all, the whole of the EU don't have fully acting throttles permitted on pedelecs.
.

I agree with lots of your comments, but I'm not sure I get this. If someone wants a throttle and more power.... they are available. Its called a Moped.

All you're doing by asking to allow eBikes with throttles and more power is bypassing the laws and regulations around mopeds isn't it? Wrapping it up to look like you're "empowering riders" isn't really what it is, is it?

And I take the points about getting half way round and not being able to get home for whatever reason. But that happens to fully able bodied riders too, all the time. I've been on rides when people have had to call a taxi or a loved one to come pick them up because they have totally run out of power (human) or had a mechanical. So the fact the pain stops someone riding home, isn't a reason to make throttles legal is it? I'm just playing devils advocate here.

But is response to the OP... I can't see there being a rush from the public side. There isn't a huge swarm of people currently thinking about buying an eBike and just holding off for one reason of another, who will now suddenly rush to buy one due to the impending law change. I suspect most potential eBike buyers who'll spend over the next 12 months currently don't even know they are going to buy an eBike yet, and have no clue of the law or changes.

The only rush that might happen is dealers buying the stock from the brands that have stock of throttle bikes left so they can sell them moving forward.

 

[torrent99]

No, a moped is not the solution.
E-bikes enjoy a number of advantages that mopeds are not allowed:
1) Parking on bike racks (lampposts, fences, etc). In cities parking can be a real problem.
2) Ability to go on "safe" cycle tracks.

Also they are much lighter, can be fitted in/on a car, and for many people they may consider maintaining a bike themselves but not a moped. For some they also offer the opportunity to slowly increase their fitness, but with a safety net if their body isn't up to it one day.

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

All valid points.... but I still don't see how these can be considered to be issues that give an argument that Pedelecs should be allowed to essentially unregistered mopeds (based on power, speed assist and throttle - which is a large part of what the cycle and motorbike industry has a problem with - and what's restricting support for pedelecs more generally in the UK).

The line in the sand between a bicycle and a motorbike needs to be clear, and as a pedelec can be seen to sit in the middle, its crucial for their development and support in the UK that there is a clear idea of what a pedelec is. The throttle undermines a lot of this in my eyes personally.

I've yet to be convinced that a thottle is anything other than a safety blanket, or a way of having a moped without any of the red tape. I'm not set in my opinion though, as if you'd asked me about eBikes generally even just 5 years ago my opinion would have been very different to today.

If they are needed, then create a clear category for them... which is what is happening isnt it?

 

[shambolic]

I agree with lots of your comments, but I'm not sure I get this. If someone wants a throttle and more power.... they are available. Its called a Moped.

All you're doing by asking to allow eBikes with throttles and more power is bypassing the laws and regulations around mopeds isn't it? Wrapping it up to look like you're "empowering riders" isn't really what it is, is it?

And I take the points about getting half way round and not being able to get home for whatever reason. But that happens to fully able bodied riders too, all the time. I've been on rides when people have had to call a taxi or a loved one to come pick them up because they have totally run out of power (human) or had a mechanical. So the fact the pain stops someone riding home, isn't a reason to make throttles legal is it? I'm just playing devils advocate here.

.

....I just knew someone would have to say that
Perhaps I need to explain some of the advantages of E-bikes for people with Mobility problems, none of which would be covered by a moped.

1) Firstly the E-bike provides an opportunity for exercise where exercise is a difficult thing to do. With a throttle you have the option to use your legs until it is either too painful or too difficult to do and then cruise for a bit on the throttle and then try a bit more and so on. I am not talking an occasional oversight in overdoing things. If you have a disease that causes Mobility issues it's not a choice.
2) Many mobility issues are not predictable from day to day, you get good days and bad, myself on a not so good day. I ride around the bike lanes in my local country park, because I don't feel well enough to deal with traffic and noise but the exercise is still beneficial. Also I get plenty of fresh air in the park, not so much on a street full of traffic.
3) I can get across my town almost solely on bike lanes. This is much safer, not sure I could handle some of the traffic on a moped.
4) Mopeds on a train - I think not. The Bike/Train/Bike option opens up the life of many disabled people massively. Places that were impossible to get to become easy.

 

[trex]

Col, you haven't ridden a bike with a throttle have you? the new regulations won't affect the regular Chinese bike importers much if at all, just a little tweak to the bike's programming to set the maximum speed of the throttle. Four out of five people who use a throttle only need it to help with starting off more quickly. They can pedal as little as they like with the pedelec disc anyway.
It's nothing to do with the 5kw monsters that people on ES build.

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

Yes, Trex... I've tired quite a few throttle bikes....

....I just knew someone would have to say that
Perhaps I need to explain some of the advantages of E-bikes for people with Mobility problems, none of which would be covered by a moped.

1) Firstly the E-bike provides an opportunity for exercise where exercise is a difficult thing to do. With a throttle you have the option to use your legs until it is either too painful or too difficult to do and then cruise for a bit on the throttle and then try a bit more and so on. I am not talking an occasional oversight in overdoing things. If you have a disease that causes Mobility issues it's not a choice.
2) Many mobility issues are not predictable from day to day, you get good days and bad, myself on a not so good day. I ride around the bike lanes in my local country park, because I don't feel well enough to deal with traffic and noise but the exercise is still beneficial. Also I get plenty of fresh air in the park, not so much on a street full of traffic.
3) I can get across my town almost solely on bike lanes. This is much safer, not sure I could handle some of the traffic on a moped.
4) Mopeds on a train - I think not. The Bike/Train/Bike option opens up the life of many disabled people massively. Places that were impossible to get to become easy.

I understand all this...and I have pretty good experience of working with a lot of individuals with special physical needs, so I do appreciate this need. Maybe what I'm trying to say, is that if you want/need a throttle on your eBike maybe it should be classed as a moped... Not that you should have an actual moped under the current legal definition.

I see the throttle as a one of the clear lines in the sand that make something not a pedal cycle, for obvious reasons.

Surely you can appreciate the problem with allowing people to ride around public parks, canal paths on cycles with throttles? You can't pick and choose the people who are allowed to do something... you have to allow or not allow the activity. Does that make sense? The concern is that incidents (or more likely, concern about incidents) involving cycles with throttles will result in reduced access for pedelecs, or even bicycles more generally because decision makers don't understand the difference and make blanket policies.

(and I fully appreciate the vast majority of people who currently ride throttle powered pedelecs in the UK are not riding the type of bike or are the type of person that is likely to cause a problem). However you can't make rules, that say... sensible people can do this, idiots can't. Which is a shame, because that would be a nice system to adopt across a lot of society I suspect.

Or maybe there should be a class of disabled vehicle or something, that needs special badges or the throttle only works to 10mph or something.

But anyway, the law will continue to align with Europe, so I suspect all our discussions about this are slightly moot anyway. But its interesting for me to read these discussions and see how lots of different people use their bicycles.

 

[jonathan75]

The EU must uphold disabled persons' independence, and their freedom to acquire goods and services across borders. It's not an option.

It turns out (according to one policy expert I spoke to) member states aren't obliged to follow 168/2013. It's addressed at manufacturers. Supposedly. (I don't necessarily agree but it's food for thought). And member states traditionally have competence in road matters. However Arts 90-100 TFEU (Lisbon) changed that. To what extent I'm not sure but the Union, especially the Commission, is itself bound by the Treaties - which the EUCFR has equal weight to.

Members states are obligated to apply arts 28 and 58 where there's an actual or potential cross-border element, with due weight to both EUCFR Art 26 (see Art 15(3)ESC for scope) & possibly Art 21, and in any case the general principles of EU law, particularly the principle(s) of proportionality. Now there's some googling fun for everyone.

I can just imagine moped manufacturers intervening. 'But what about our right to monopolise transport for persons with disabilities?' ROFL.

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

The EU must uphold disabled persons' independence, and their freedom to acquire goods and services across borders. It's not an option.

I do see your point... but would you allow a disabled person to attached a rocket pack to a bicycle and ride that down the high street?

I don't think the law is trying to restrict a disables person's independence? Just there are certain things that are classed as a bicycle and things that aren't - this classification isn't going to restrict anyone's independence is it?

 

[shambolic]

KTM Yes, it looks like a done deal but I don't agree that disabled people should be done out of a great opportunity that nothing else offers, just because certain lobby's are wanting to ensure their income, if that argument had been applied to the NHS it wouldn't exist today. And the argument that somehow a bike with a throttle in a park is more likely to cause an accident than an assisted bike is not logical. People tend to go faster when they are pedaling don't they? And the act of pedaling itself loses some element of control. The E-bikes we have been using to date seem well defined I don't see the need to change that but certain businesses do...

If you create a special disable class of bike the price would treble at least, the disability market it full of old tech rubbish at massively inflated prices. Mobility scooters are ridiculously overpriced for the tech you get. That's what brought me to the E-bike market in the first place. The tech I get for £1000 on an E-bike would cost at least £5000 if put in a mobility scooter.

Disabled people will be thrown back into the Mobility Scooter market, which offers no exercise value, thereby shortening their lives...and I'm not being melodramatic here.

You on the other hand are with the statement "I do see your point... but would you allow a disabled person to attached a rocket pack to a bicycle and ride that down the high street?" that would be of no benefit to the disabled and you know it, it hardly seems worth mentioning that fact. Why did you say that?

 

[trex]

Yes, Trex... I've tired quite a few throttle bikes....
.

I assume the ones you rode come from regular Chinese bike importers. Their bikes aren't mopeds now, then why alluding that their bikes are mopeds after December 31st?

 

[jonathan75]

I do see your point... but would you allow a disabled person to attached a rocket pack to a bicycle and ride that down the high street?

I don't think the law is trying to restrict a disables person's independence? Just there are certain things that are classed as a bicycle and things that aren't - this classification isn't going to restrict anyone's independence is it?

Ok glad you mentioned that - so the big flaw in your argument is a throttle pedelec isn't a rocket pack, it's exactly what non disabled persons are allowed, but with a throttle. So it's not really on to put people with bad knees in more cotton wool than others. Nor is their evidence that people with bad knees are more likely to mow people down. That's offensive. BUT I accept non pedallers may have different visibility and speed assumptions by onlookers to pedallers. Let's say these are serious issues which must be addressed. The ingenious principle of proportionality requires among other things that the restriction on treaty freedoms be the least restrictive measure possible, to achieve a legitimate aim (here the safety of non cyclists). It must be rationally connected with that aim. And finally it must,must reach an acceptable balance of goods and harms in light of the Treaties and in light of social considerations. But here I'm looking at arguments you didn't make. All the same I think there is a less draconian step available to protect people than a total ban.

I'm sure you can think of such a step! Daytime running lights? Publicity campaign? I'm not even convinced any such step is necessary. Strict,strict 15mph limit rules with a free sva just for the limiter? Maybe.

Oh incidentally your second para -this is what's called equal in law, unequal, (& discriminatory and harmful) in effect. To say ' oh we weren't considering disabled persons ' actually makes the harm to disabled persons Treaty rights more, not less illegitimate. The claimed intent (or lack of) of a national or Commission measure is only relevant to its legality under the Treaties, in its stating the legitimate aim part of the proportionality analysis I mentioned in the earlier paragraph.

 

[mike killay]

Both my pedelecs have throttles and I just do not recognise the allegation that they are mopeds.
Compared to mopeds they are feeble beyond belief.
I need the throttle because of my arthritis.
I have no interest in buying a European bike anyway, the Chinese ones are far better value for money, far less complicated, and have throttles!

 

[torrent99]

Both my pedelecs have throttles and I just do not recognise the allegation that they are mopeds.
Compared to mopeds they are feeble beyond belief.
I need the throttle because of my arthritis.
I have no interest in buying a European bike anyway, the Chinese ones are far better value for money, far less complicated, and have throttles!

Indeed a "legal" bike is completely unlike a moped!

At the end of the day how do many pedelecs work anyway? You turn the pedals and the motor comes on. The controller just looks for the turning of the pedals, you don't actually need to be putting any power into the pedals, and the motor comes on. What's the difference between that and a throttle? Not much, except that
a) the throttle gives you MORE CONTROL.
b) From a stand still you do need to put quite a lot of force in to get the pedals moving. Force which is too much for many with knee conditions.

For me the mere act of turning the pedals (even with zero load) can on some days really irritate my knee condition, so having a throttle is essential.

And BTW what is the legal definition of a moped?

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

Indeed a "legal" bike is completely unlike a moped!

And BTW what is the legal definition of a moped?

Not sure how you can suggest they are that far removed from one another.

Even the definition according to wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moped

"A moped (/ˈmoʊpɛd/ MOH-ped) is a small motorcycle, generally having a less stringent licensing requirement than motorcycles, or automobiles, because mopeds typically travel about the same speed as bicycles on public roadways. Strictly speaking, mopeds are driven by both an engine and by bicycle pedals, but in common usage and in many jurisdictions the term moped is used for any moped-sized motorcycle even if it does not have pedals."

So that describes a pedelec which has an electric engine doesn't it?

Further down the page... is the legal definition for the EU. So all the separates from some eBikes is the requirement to be taxed, insured and licensed - because its classed as a motor vehicle, not a pedal bicycle.

The drivers license category for mopeds across the E.U. now is the AM driver's license. This license is for scooters and mopeds with no more than 50 cc (3.1 cu in), and a maximum speed of 45 km/h (28 mph). E.U. member countries that had not fully implemented the E.U. directive that refers to the moped and other drivers license categories had to do so by 2013 at the latest.

The "E.U. moped" is a scooter, moped (or similar) with two, three or four wheels, a maximum speed of 45 km/h (28 mph) and an obligatory license plate as proof of insurance. Many E.U. countries only require special insurer issued plates, not state issued plates.

 

[mike killay]

Apparently, you can only 'underpedal' on Chinese bikes with a magnet ring sensor.
European bikes are far to posh for such a thing and measure the amount of force you put into pedalling before doling out a bit of power

 

[torrent99]

I've seen this on a number of UK government websites:

Moped category definition
A moped (category AM) is defined as having a maximum design speed over 25km/h (15.5mph) but not exceeding 45 km/h (28 mph); or a light quadricycle with an unladen weight not more than 350kg and up to 45km/h. It has an engine capacity no greater than 50 cubic centimetres (cc) and can be moved by pedals if it was first used before 1 September 1977.

It seems a Moped is no longer a MoPED! Now it's just a Mo.

But let's see how it compares to a typical pedelec with a throttle:
a) Design speed over 25kph, up to 45kph. Nope pedelec design speed is MAX 25kph.
b) Unladen weight not more than 350kg. Strictly yes but your average pedelec is likely less than 25kg.
c) Engine capacity < 50cc. I'm no good at working out what 50cc is likely to be in KW but according to http://www.ridesafebacksafe.co.uk/2012/07/09/new-2013-legislation-for-mopeds-motorcyles-and-tricycles/ it's about 4kw. Again, the legal limit for pedelecs is 250W and even stretching it for peak powers it's probably only max 500W.
d) If built after 1977 must not have pedals. Nuff said...

So according to the legal definition in the UK, a throttle controlled pedelec looks very little like a Moped. In fact if we were to build a Moped's worth of throttle controlled pedelec it would be a VERY powerful animal indeed! (and cost a whole football teams worth of arms and legs too!)

Stretching it further, if a throttle controlled pedelec is a moped, then my 1.6L Astra is a Sherman Tank with Formula 1 like performance.
(remember we are not talking about the non-"legal" pedelecs that go 30mph with 1000W motors, just the normal run of the mill 15mph bikes)