DfT Launches Consultations on Use of SPEVs

[Blew it]

Analyzing my own riding style, there are two occasions when I use the throttle.

A quick whiff when pulling away, especially on an up-slope. As soon as the pedelec kicks in the throttle is dropped.

When walking the bike up a hill which is too steep for me to ride.

Unless I'm reading it wrongly, this will still be possible under the proposed changes. ( Panasonic powered Kalkhoffs can be fitted with a walk-along-side throttle)

Actions
"Provide Clarity - Amend GB EAPC Regulations to clarify that EAPCs manufactured from a certain future date may only supply power assistance only when the rider is pedalling (other than perhaps at very low speeds to assist start up e.g. 6 km/h)."

Possible changes to regulatory text
"Add a clause to paragraph 4 of the EAPC Regulations to clarify that power assistance is only available up to 6 km/h without the rider pedalling"

I believe the greatest problem will be in trying to prove when a particular machine was manufactured. Having just looked through the receipts for new machines which I have purchased, not one of them includes the serial number for the relative machine. If I pencil in the serial number, this will be viewed with suspicion.

 

[flecc]

Unless I'm reading it wrongly, this will still be possible under the proposed changes. ( Panasonic powered Kalkhoffs can be fitted with a walk-along-side throttle)

Yes, this is automatic anyway, regardless of whether written into e-bike law.

An e-bike walked alongside under pedestrian control falls under the existing Pedestrian Controlled Vehicle Regulations, limited to 4 mph in the Uk and 6 kph in the EU. The Royal Mail amongst others use delivery vehicles within this law. It's from those pre-existing laws that the unnecessary e-bike provision was derived, following BikeTec of Switzerland introducing to the market the walk alongside throttle on some of their bikes.
.

 

[Clarkey]

I think that Pedelec legislation is one of those rare examples of lawmakers getting things right. Sure, people will always want a bit more power and speed but that will always be the case. For me the balance is spot on and it is about time that the EAPC/Pedelec confusion was cleared up.

It will be interesting to see if very low performance purely electric vehicles (Segway, YikeBike?) gain a new category.

 

[lemmy]

Hi

Whats the problem with having a throttle, is it just to do with someone sitting in a room somewhere who has just been given the task of making some laws up for us E-bikers by the man in charge

Such cynicism! It is a highly knowledgeable specialist weighing up the pros and cons of throttle operation and making laws to protect us from harm and ourselves.

For example, if you allowed throttle operation. It could be marked from, say, 1 - 10 with a maximum speed as of now of 15mph. How long before someone changed that from 10 to 11 and took it just that little bit over the edge and thus upped the speed from 15 to 16.5 mph.

Human nature would dictate that before long someone would mark their throttle from 1 to 60! Then we would all be going at 90mph!

If not having a throttle saves just one life, it's worth it.

 

[Marky T]

Surely though that's a performance issue, I'm all for having limits on overall speed and restrictions to stop an E-bikes doing obscure speeds, which a normal pedal cycle could never reach, even with the fittest of riders riding them, but the no throttle law, is surely a law for laws sake, after all, any average rider can propell an E-bike over 15mph using pedals. It just seems to me that it's a law, telling people which part of their anatomy, they're allowed to use, to apply energy to an electric motor, I cannot really see any Health & Safety issues.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

Throttle

I somewhat agree with Clarkey. My feeling is we are very lucky to have this special dispensation allowing the use of electric power on bikes without interference from government.

I also am worried that if we push these limits too far we may end up loosing what we have already.

However;

I do take exception with the throttle restrictions for many of the arguments made in this thread thus far, I believe that a full throttle up to 15.5mph makes the bikes safer to ride in poor conditions and of course enables the rider to take a rest occasionally which surely is the point of an electric bike. I also believe a 350W motor would make hill climbing less difficult and help a rider to maintain a sensible speed, again making the bike safer.

We at BEBA will be making a report to the DfT, I will include arguments from this thread.

Best regards

David

 

[Alex728]

over the festive period I rode from Ipswich to Botesdale and back on the B1113 on two separate occasiona, although it wasn't too treacherous there were times I was glad for the throttle and the handliing of a e-bike and I would surely have stacked it on my pushbike...

 

[Marky T]

I somewhat agree with Clarkey. My feeling is we are very lucky to have this special dispensation allowing the use of electric power on bikes without interference from government.

I also am worried that if we push these limits too far we may end up loosing what we have already.

However;

I do take exception with the throttle restrictions for many of the arguments made in this thread thus far, I believe that a full throttle up to 15.5mph makes the bikes safer to ride in poor conditions and of course enables the rider to take a rest occasionally which surely is the point of an electric bike. I also believe a 350W motor would make hill climbing less difficult and help a rider to maintain a sensible speed, again making the bike safer.


We at BEBA will be making a report to the DfT, I will include arguments from this thread.

Best regards

David

Thanks David

I've only had my E-bike since about October last year, and I like it the way it is. The throttle is just a nice extra that helps better the E-bike experience and sets E-bikes apart from normal bikes, although I realise we do need rules for Health & Safety issues, I just can't see any problems in having a throttle.

Best regards
Mark

 

[tonio]

I totally concur with Marky T on the throttle issue.I also hope David and other representatives fight hard on this issue, a throttle driven bike is far safer to ride especially in this icy weather where fine control is needed.
Kept to around15.5 mph + -10% i could live with. Totally pedelec, i dont think ebikes will ever meet their potential and sales would suffer. I know members are divided on this issue but if its a very small number of ebike enthusiasts with very large wallets {Kalkhoff etc} then lose the throttle. If its a relatively cheap car alternative that can improve the lifestyle of overweight youngsters, the elderly on state pensions and arthritis sufferers like myself then throttles are better. The ebike properly marketed and safely utilised could take thousands of polluting and congesting cars off the road in the u.k for most of the year. £2000+pedelec only ebikes ebikes? you get what you pay for,most couldnt justify the expense fuel costs considered. Id rather pay insurance to run a decent ebike though than see them legislated into impracticality or reserved as a rich mans toy.

 

[eddieo]

I guess its a little like Americans and there guns..........I don't use the throttle that much but defend my right to own one!

 

[dan]

throttle use

I somewhat agree with Clarkey. My feeling is we are very lucky to have this special dispensation allowing the use of electric power on bikes without interference from government.

I also am worried that if we push these limits too far we may end up loosing what we have already.

However;

I do take exception with the throttle restrictions for many of the arguments made in this thread thus far, I believe that a full throttle up to 15.5mph makes the bikes safer to ride in poor conditions and of course enables the rider to take a rest occasionally which surely is the point of an electric bike. I also believe a 350W motor would make hill climbing less difficult and help a rider to maintain a sensible speed, again making the bike safer.

We at BEBA will be making a report to the DfT, I will include arguments from this thread.

Best regards

David

The new EU build and safety standard for epacs took several years to complete. The Dutch delegates (Giant and Panasonic) at first wanted to invite the Japanese to attend the committee meetings to push for the Japanese standard to be adopted. Other delegates, notable the Germans said they would pull out of negotiations if the Japanese were allowed to attend, the Dutch dropped the request. The British delegates wanted to introduce a section for pure throttle operation to be included in the standard, as at that time it was felt that to restrict epacs to pedal assist only would damage sales in the UK market; this was opposed by the Dutch who still wanted the Japanese standard introduced. It was pointed out by the chairman of the committee (France) that the committee was dealing with build and safety issues not each countries local road traffic act requirements and that pure throttle operation was not a safety issue. As at that time the DfT had stated they had no intention to change the road traffic act in the UK, this point of throttle operation was dropped to allow progress on the standard to move forward.

To give an example, a restricted 50 cc moped has the same build and safety standard throughout the EU, however in France you can ride a 50 cc moped at age 14 without a license, in the UK you have to have a full driving license issued before 2001 take a one day CBT course, or have a provisional license and be at least 16. Each countries riding requirements having no bearing on the build and safety standard.

For the DfT to now want to change the road traffic act, for something that is not a safety issue and is not required by EU laws, and will be to the detriment of UK sales is unfair.

Also the DfT says that by bringing the pedal assist only regulation into force will allow the UK suppliers to compete on a like for like basis with other EEC countries and reduce costs is ridiculous, to add pedal assist to full powered bike costs almost nothing, and as can been seen from offerings by almost all UK suppliers they have dual system bikes already.

A final point is that under motorcycle type approval safety testing for low powered mopeds (the class that most electric bikes would fall into if the law was changed) their is no set test for throttle construction or application. As it is not considered a safety issue.

 

[Marky T]

I rest my case.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

200W or 700W

The problem is that the majority of regulators are not electric bike riders and do not have a clue how a throttle and a correctly powered motor would add to our enjoyment and safety. It seems they would rather be ultra cautious, at the moment it is politically correct dumb down and restrict rather than let market forces work out the optimum specs.

It is interesting that in the USA and Canada where full throttles, speeds of up to 20mph and 700W of power is permissible the trend is for 350W motors as they give the optimum performance in speed, range and safety.

We at BEBA along with ETRA will certainly be trying to persuade DfT and EU to make changes but it could take a while!

In my opinion a 17mph, 350W, full throttle is absolutly spot on.

All the best

David

 

[dan]

I rest my case.

being right wont help if the dfT change the road traffic act, removing the use of a throttle will damage the electric bike trade in the UK. It may not affect most of the members here, but in general terms I think it could reduce sales by more than 50%....i would stress this is just my opinion.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

50%

Hi Dan

I think 50% may be a little high, don't forget we can have a throttle up to 6kph and then as long as you are turning the pedals the throttle does not need to cut out until 15.5mph +/- 10%.

I am delighted the DfT are asking the questions and hopefully will give us a sensible decision.

All the best

David

 

[Marky T]

The problem is that the majority of regulators are not electric bike riders and do not have a clue how a throttle and a correctly powered motor would add to our enjoyment and safety. It seems they would rather be ultra cautious, at the moment it is politically correct dumb down and restrict rather than let market forces work out the optimum specs.

It is interesting that in the USA and Canada where full throttles, speeds of up to 20mph and 700W of power is permissible the trend is for 350W motors as they give the optimum performance in speed, range and safety.

We at BEBA along with ETRA will certainly be trying to persuade DfT and EU to make changes but it could take a while!

In my opinion a 17mph, 350W, full throttle is absolutly spot on.

All the best

David

Hi David,

I see what you mean, we really need to get our point across and let the regulators see our needs. Obviously we need speed restrictions which would probably one of the first things on their list, but we need our health and safety points of veiw aired and now we have people like yourself in BEBA, thank goodness, our opinions maybe taken into account.

Regards Mark

 

[dan]

Hi Dan

I think 50% may be a little high, don't forget we can have a throttle up to 6kph and then as long as you are turning the pedals the throttle does not need to cut out until 15.5mph +/- 10%.

I am delighted the DfT are asking the questions and hopefully will give us a sensible decision.

All the best

David

You agree it will cause loss of sales to the detriment of the UK electric bike trade, and that removal of the throttle will not give you any significant advantage in the rest of the EU, ending in a net loss sales to all UK suppliers.
You need to press the point.

Also this is not the first time the DfT has considered this action, they did the same in 2001/2, and after representation from what was then a much smaller electric bike industry, elected not to change the law.

 

[Mussels]

For me the throttle is a safety feature as it makes the bike far more stable when ridden across snow and ice, I can't see that swaying opinion though.

 

[Alex728]

The problem is that the majority of regulators are not electric bike riders and do not have a clue how a throttle and a correctly powered motor would add to our enjoyment and safety. It seems they would rather be ultra cautious, at the moment it is politically correct dumb down and restrict rather than let market forces work out the optimum specs.

whilst I don't know what went on in foreign lands, what I think may have "poisoned the well" in Britain nearly 10 years ago now was a large amount of electric and petrol "mini-motos/monkey bikes" which were basically kids' toys, got ridden anti-socially by "chavs" (particularly on cycle paths) and that is what some Civil Servants may well associate with "electric bikes" (especially having been lobbied by the cops and local Councils when this happened)

there might even be a bit of "pro-pushbike" snobbery as being a former Civil Servant I know for a fact there is a very strong "pro-cycling" lobby within Whitehall, particularly within Defra and DfT, with 700c wheeled hybrids or tourers being preffered to mountain bikes!

I think its worth putting across the strong point that something like a Wisper is a high value machine purchased by a responsible citizen and if they are younger in age they are usually in their late 20s or 30s and safe road users, they have chosen not to obtain a moped/motorcycle and are happy with the "slower" speed but can and do safely make use of a throttle.

I agree that 350W / 17mph would be a good compromise between speed, power and battery range. Incidentally if this were allowed, would this be available as an upgrade to an existing 905?

 

[flecc]

Also this is not the first time the DfT has considered this action, they did the same in 2001/2, and after representation from what was then a much smaller electric bike industry, elected not to change the law.

This wasn't due to any representation or a concious decision by the DfT.

The British law permitting throttles was accidentally left on place instead of being rescinded when the civil service left enactment of the EU pedelecs law order to the last minute, rushing it through parliament on 10th November.

Here's the EU order, from which you'll see that we passed it into law one day late as a result of that rush. Note the words, "and abolish their previous regulation", the point on which our civil service failed:

The EU-Directive 2002/24/EC concerning the Type approval for two and three wheeled vehicles has been released by the European Parliament and the Council on March 18, 2002.

In Article1 (h) “cycles with pedal assistance which are equipped with an auxiliary electric motor having a maximum continuous rated power of 0.25 kW, of which the output is progressively reduced and finally cut off as the vehicle reaches a speed of 25 km/h, or sooner, if the cyclist stops pedaling” are excluded from type approval.

Pedelecs which exceed the technical specifications must have a type approval and are classified as “mopeds”, and must consequently abide by all additional laws, i.e. motorcycle helmet, adequate brakes, mirrors etc.

The EU Directive 2002/24/EC comes into effect on
May 9, 2003 and will replace the current Directive
92/61/EEC.

Until May 9, 2003 the current national regulations concerning the status of pedelecs will remain unchanged.
After May 9, 2003, the EU Member States have the choice of either keeping their current regulations for another 6 months or changing over to the EU-directive.

By November 9, 2003 all Members of the EU are required to integrate this Directive into their national legislation and abolish their previous regulations.

Therefore our 1983 EAPC regulations permitting throttles should by law have been abolished by 9th November 2003.
.