Directgov advice about "off road" buttons

[Alex728]

Since as traffic officers they work with road speed limits of between 20 mph and 70 mph, any slight increase in vehicle capability below any of those is very unlikely to be thought of as the main basis for the cause of an accident.

They are professionals and will look for the real cause(s) and not be distracted by irrelevant side issues.
.

I agree with this (especially having owned a radio scanner in the pre airwave days ). I certainly do not feel "out of control" nor "unsafe" at 15-20mph, as I used to regularly do that sort of speed on my unpowered pushbikes in far more crowded areas of SE England. Nor do I feel that I an riding in a dangerous manner or intimidating other road users which would attract the attention of the cops. But I never ride on the pavement and rarely use if ever the shared use paths...

I think there is still a risk of the job of "policing e-bikes" in some areas being delegated to the PCSO's and the "safer neighbourhood teams" who are not traffic specialists and being ignorant of the real risks might just target any e-biker with any bike which vaguely looked like it might have an "off-road" button...

 

[Bigbee]

I agree ,e-bikes should be put into high risk catagories by civil servants and let immigrants,hoodies,drug addicts,etc etc etc go free,or get a telling off,or pay them to not re-offend or go back home to their own country FFS!


Its the way to go,oh I hate what has become of our country,off topic sorry.

 

[z0mb13e]

I wouldn't worry, pretty soon we will legislate ourselves out of existance!

So to disconnect or not to disconnect. That is the question...

 

[Alex728]

I wouldn't worry, pretty soon we will legislate ourselves out of existance!

So to disconnect or not to disconnect. That is the question...

depends firstly on if the cops do start taking notice, however a bike without the obvious button looks normal whether or not it is being ridden unrestricted, the only difference being the speed which as others pointed out is hard to judge anyway.

TBH I don't think it makes a massive difference at this point.

Most e-bikes are ridden by grown men from their thirties onwards who have got to the stage where they have grown up enough not to be stupid on the roads but still like new toys - so they are very unlikely to be a nuisance to wider society - even in comparison to normal push bikes and their riders.

I wonder if/when more powerful e-bikes start appearing on these shores and become popular/affordable with the 20-somethings (especially those piqued by increasing perceived costs of motoring) might be when things start getting harsher. particularly if the faster Chinese "scooter type bikes" were to arrive here...

 

[Sir_Bob]

Bigbee

I think you missing the point, electric bikes are not the same crime like hoodies, druggies or foriegner. They cause no harm and should be allowed.

thx

Bob

 

[Alex728]

what about if drug dealing illegal immigrants wearing hoodies were to start using high powered e-bikes as courier and getaway vehicles?

whilst I'm being slightly facetious this concept isn't even as outlandish as you might think... high end mountain bikes were many drug dealers vehicles of choice during the 1990s..

 

[Phil the drill]

Just as a quick note to Wisper owners - if you remove the appropriate pot. in the controller housing, then disconnect and remove the "off road" button, you will find you have permanently derestricted your bike.....and no button can be seen .

Phil

 

[flecc]

I wonder if/when more powerful e-bikes start appearing on these shores and become popular/affordable with the 20-somethings (especially those piqued by increasing perceived costs of motoring) might be when things start getting harsher. particularly if the faster Chinese "scooter type bikes" were to arrive here...

This is a definite worry which could arrive if the 500 watt class comes in, and it's one reason why I've never been in favour of the widely sought after relaxation of the assist speed limit. As things stand we are one of the few areas of freedom from bureaucracy and nanny state interference and are able in consequence to enjoy much higher actual powers and assist speeds with almost no risk of detection or prevention. By fighting to legalise these benefits we could destroy our freedom and end up with far more restriction and a more unpleasant environment to ride in.
.

 

[monster]

there was a police cyclist on my cycle route today, he was talking to a dog walker. got his attention straight away with my insainly bright dual 10w lights. probably though i was riding a moped on a bike cycle path -untill i got close enough for him to see i was riding an electric bike. he just carried on talking to to the dog owner.

i think riding an illegal electric bike would be a warning or telling off, like they give to youths riding go-peds.

 

[simonbarnett]

This is a definite worry which could arrive if the 500 watt class comes in, and it's one reason why I've never been in favour of the widely sought after relaxation of the assist speed limit. As things stand we are one of the few areas of freedom from bureaucracy and nanny state interference and are able in consequence to enjoy much higher actual powers and assist speeds with almost no risk of detection or prevention. By fighting to legalise these benefits we could destroy our freedom and end up with far more restriction and a more unpleasant environment to ride in.
.

Spot on, Flecc- discretion is the better part of valour (or something like that). Shouting that you're already breaking the law so want it changed is only effective if there's an irresistible tide behind you; unlikely for high powered ebikes. So keep discrete.

 

[Alex728]

i think riding an illegal electric bike would be a warning or telling off, like they give to youths riding go-peds.

even then I would only expect / hope (?) that would only occur if other citizens whined about it or you were blatantly going way too fast for the road conditions or riding on the footpaths or any other place you shouldn't be.

IMO the real issue with go-peds, monkey bikes and other mini-moto type devices was that they were noisy and often ridden in a antisocial manner by young teens who shout abuse back at and threaten the citizens who challenge them causing the cops to get called in the first place.

even with normal push bikes there is supposed to be some sort of informal "18 mph" speed limit for shared use paths and dedicated cycle facilities where the DfT advise riders who wish to go faster they "should ride on the road". TBH anyone going at that speed unpowered is going to be a lycra and/or on 700c wheels and would probably not want to ride on the segregated facilities anyway.

 

[Barnowl]

even with normal push bikes there is supposed to be some sort of informal "18 mph" speed limit for shared use paths and dedicated cycle facilities where the DfT advise riders who wish to go faster they "should ride on the road".

Never came across that before. 18MPH limit for a shared use path seems remarkably fast. I'm assuming you mean shared as in pavement/pedestrian/Cyclist?

 

[Alex728]

been thinking a bit more about this and I smell a rat..

Found a few older versions of DfT leaflet from the mid 2000s and the off road button is not mentioned, despite many bikes without it being capable of higher speeds... It has however made its way into 2009 leaflets. Being a former Civil Servant myself, I learned that bureaucrats do not actually sit around in high-tech control centres watching everyone on CCTV and stroking white cats looking for ways to catch people out.

What I did learn is that the bulk of calls to actually implement and enforce "nanny state" legislation came from "concerned citizens" via "whistleblowing/consultation/complaint" procedures set up ostensibly to ensure a "Fairer Britain".

About 80% of the time the "concerned citizen" was a commercial rival of the organisation they were complaining about, and using regulations as a way to try and make a competitors life difficult - for all the faults of the "bloody cyclists" brigade I hardly think they are scrutinising the technical capabilities of e-bikes in any large depth - I think you can see what I am getting at

 

[Alex728]

Never came across that before. 18MPH limit for a shared use path seems remarkably fast. I'm assuming you mean shared as in pavement/pedestrian/Cyclist?

its an obscure and rather unclear note tacked on the end of a "code of conduct for cyclists" intended to be posted as a sign on the start of such places like Sustrans routes.

Ride at a sensible speed for the situation and ensure you can stop in time. As a general rule, if you want to cycle quickly, say in excess of 18 mph/30 kph, then you should be riding on the road.

[ARCHIVED CONTENT] Department for Transport - Annex D: Code of Conduct Notice for Cyclists

 

[Mussels]

been thinking a bit more about this and I smell a rat..

Found a few older versions of DfT leaflet from the mid 2000s and the off road button is not mentioned, despite many bikes without it being capable of higher speeds... It has however made its way into 2009 leaflets. Being a former Civil Servant myself, I learned that bureaucrats do not actually sit around in high-tech control centres watching everyone on CCTV and stroking white cats looking for ways to catch people out.

What I did learn is that the bulk of calls to actually implement and enforce "nanny state" legislation came from "concerned citizens" via "whistleblowing/consultation/complaint" procedures set up ostensibly to ensure a "Fairer Britain".

About 80% of the time the "concerned citizen" was a commercial rival of the organisation they were complaining about, and using regulations as a way to try and make a competitors life difficult - for all the faults of the "bloody cyclists" brigade I hardly think they are scrutinising the technical capabilities of e-bikes in any large depth - I think you can see what I am getting at

So it's 50Cycles fault then?

 

[Barnowl]

came from "concerned citizens" via "whistleblowing/consultation/complaint" procedures set up ostensibly to ensure a "Fairer Britain".

:

And so if I was the hypothetical civil servant doing some stuff on E-Bikes I would probably google e-bike and oh oh what do we have here then - pedelecs and a debate on off-road buttons. Dig not much deeper and there's a thread on cog sizes and Kalkhoffs, or 175RPM Tongxin V 190RPM or 240.

 

[Alex728]

So it's 50Cycles fault then?

Could be any competitor TBH - even the ones who are like "friendly enemies". TBH it could just be a "private citizen" but I've not heard of any yet being knocked down by a derestricted e-bike, bear in mind also company employees can also act in the capacity of a "private citizen"..

The "beauty" for business rivals of using the "Whitehall" route to cause grief to competitors is correspondence between individuals and a Government Department is usually classified "Restricted" or "Protect" due to privacy laws so is exempt from FOI disclosure, and the justification for snitching can always be explained away as "encouraging a health and safety concious culture within then industry..."

if you look at the ETRA thread its mentioned how the motorbike manufacturers are lobbying against more powerful e-bikes to prevent their market being potentially eroded..

Ironically it appears just as many Panasonic-based bikes can be (and are) modified to go over speed!

 

[flecc]

So it's 50Cycles fault then?

Seems highly unlikely, considering that they are happy to reduce the sprockets on the standard Kalkhoffs they sell to do exactly the same thing, also sell the Pro Connect S high speed class e-bike with an even faster model coming for 2010, and were equally happy to sell the 22 mph Torq 1 in very large numbers.

Drawing attention to this subject is hardly in their interests.
.

 

[Alex728]

Spot on, Flecc- discretion is the better part of valour (or something like that). Shouting that you're already breaking the law so want it changed is only effective if there's an irresistible tide behind you; unlikely for high powered ebikes. So keep discrete.

in the 1990s a similar thing was tried with cannabis - and despite the usual amount of bitter opposition, there was nearly some minor success with half-hearted attempts at a tolerant stance based on that of some nations across the North Sea..

Then some greedy/stupid folks popularised a faster growing variety called skunk which was "stronger" but instead of making people mellow and giggling, made people much more demotivated and paranoid / irrational and in some cases caused some very bad mental health issues...

Although bicycles are hardly as contentious as recreational drug use (there is thankfully no UN single convention prohibiting two wheeled vehicles) I see the risk of a tremendous own goal if people are not careful.

However as many have mentioned there's not a lot of difference between 15mph and 18/19 mph and I really doubt if most bobbies (even those who are regular cyclist themselves) could judge how fast a cyclist is going without being issued with expensive speed checking equipment.... I do actually wonder if Whitehall is actually "thinking ahead" to the point where the 500/1000W models become popular or the authorities are starting to take an interest in the kits?

 

[Mussels]

However as many have mentioned there's not a lot of difference between 15mph and 18/19 mph and I really doubt if most bobbies (even those who are regular cyclist themselves) could judge how fast a cyclist is going without being issued with expensive speed checking equipment.... I do actually wonder if Whitehall is actually "thinking ahead" to the point where the 500/1000W models become popular or the authorities are starting to take an interest in the kits?

In London there's a lot of bobbies whp are keen cyclists and a lot of them ride a bike round their beat, I expect they can see the difference.
I believe that if a copper thinks a motor vehicle has been tampered with to make it illegal they can get it tested or at least issue a rectification notice that has to be stamped by a garage to say the vehicle is road legal, some may call it summary justice for minor offences.