Interesting comment on kits and the law!
Electric Bikes WhyCycle? - The impartial cycling advice site
Indalo
Electric Bikes WhyCycle? - The impartial cycling advice site
Indalo
On the contrary, that simplified article specifies the limits that are in UK SI 1168 and UK SI 1176, the two Statutory Instruments that apply.This would seem to imply that UK limits are no big deal and don't require all the hoo-haa. Maybe this will all be the case for the updated requirements when the EU standards are adopted.
The point is, it doesn't say it needs to be certified in any way. If it had to be approved to those standards then that would surely have been stated.
The OP's link also seemed to suggest that those standards are for retailers rather than owners to conform to. That would make sense to me.
Unfortunately it's not. This is Statute Law, so the onus is on the manufacturer (who may be the person that fits a kit to a bike) to prove that the motor can only deliver 200W output, as defined by the method described in BS1727:1971.BS1727:1971 may well be used to determine the power of your motor should the need arise but if your motor is declared to be 200W then it's upto others to prove that it's not.
There's no implication that you have to have proof that your motor has already been tested and approved under the standards.
Yep... it needs to be type approved to show that its of a type that fits the exemption, as opposed to type that doesn'ta bike needs to be type approved to prove that it doesn't need to be type approved.
Demonstrating compliance with Statute Law is a general principle that applies whenever there is a requirement for a statement of fact.I must be missing something... I don't see any pre-approval requirement there other than your interpretation at the end.
The brief EAPC requirements I linked to say that only bikes that don't meet the requirements need to be type approved. But you seem to be saying that a bike needs to be type approved to prove that it doesn't need to be type approved.
I think you're correct. In the case in the other thread where a woman was appealing against her conviction of driving without insurance for using a scooter, the court didn't ask for any approval documentation, If the approval had been required by law, the case would have been black or white and would never have got to the appeal. Instead, they made their own decision on whether it met the requirements, which it didn't.Well I've checked the legislation and various dft doc's and can find no requirements for any certification or pre-approval of EAPCs built to UK reg's.
Meaning, if you build an EAPC with no cert's or approval and it's checked for conformity at any time, it will be perfectly legal if found to conform to the UK EAPC regulations. Of course, if it doesn't conform then you may find yourself in trouble.
The bike doesn't need to be approved by anyone or to any standard to be legal. It just has to meet the requirements.As I keep saying, there is no need for approval documentation with any ebike that has been approved to the UK Statutory Instruments.
The plate has to show:What is required is a data plate that shows the data derived from a test performed according to the British Standard, BS1727:1971.
I can't quite understand why this is such a hard concept to grasp. If you want to be legal under UK (not EU) law then the data on the required plate has to be that from the British Standard test.
This is not the same as requiring specific test results. This is the rated output as defined by (not tested to) BS.the continuous rated output (as defined in the 1971 British Standard) of the motor of the vehicle.
Go and read the British Standard referred to in the law.The bike doesn't need to be approved by anyone or to any standard to be legal. It just has to meet the requirements.
The plate has to show:
This is not the same as requiring specific test results. This is the rated output as defined by (not tested to) BS.
It doesn't matter. Theres no legal requirement to test the motor so the testing standards are moot until such a time as the specific motor needs to be tested.Go and read the British Standard referred to in the law.
If you do, then you will see exactly what is needed, rather than keep persisting with the view that the law can be ignored.
How much more obvious can the part of the law be that says how the motor power output HAS to be determined?It doesn't matter. Theres no legal requirement to test the motor so the testing standards are moot until such a time as the specific motor needs to be tested.
Quite clearly it's the continuous output that the motor of the vehicle is rated for. It's the rated output that's referenced, not the actual output.How do you propose obtaining the "continuous rated output of the motor of the vehicle" in a way that fits the law?
Exactly! If you read the British Standard then there is a definition in it as to what is meant by "continuous rated output". This is not the same as the label on the motor, by a long way, it is the output when measured using the method and test equipment defined in the British Standard.Quite clearly it's the continuous output that the motor of the vehicle is rated for. It's the rated output that's referenced, not the actual output.
Further to the EAPCs of the UK, I've just been reading about the EPACs of the EU and I can't find any testing or approval requirements in the EN15194 standard either. Although there are many (very many) test methods detailed for production and compliance testing, I found no actual requirements for any of these tests.