Let's keep the throttle!

Let's not give up in the battle to keep the full range throttle available in the UK on EAPCs. After all , the government minister ,Claire Perry , promised to keep them in her statement to Parliament this year.

The new Type Approval regs due on 1.1.17 have a suitable class for powered bicycles and if the requirements for this are sensible it should not be an insuperable hurdle for would-be sellers.

Edited August 11, 201510 yr by hoppy

Completely agree.

Do you know on what date she spoke in the house? I'd like to look that up in Hansard.

Completely agree.

 

Do you know on what date she spoke in the house? I'd like to look that up in Hansard.

Date was 24.2.15

I have been enjoying the good weather of late and made several visits to Willen Lake in Milton Keynes.

There has been a fair on for the school kids and it has been very busy with parents and toddlers.

My throttle and brake cut out switches have come to the fore allowing me to maintain full hand control and safely negotiate around them, something you can't do with a torque sensor as there are no brake cut out switches, the only option being is to switch off the assistance.

Date was 24.2.15

Clare Perry: "There is one more point to respond to. The twist and go classifications will be permitted up to 15.5 mph. A vehicle under that limit will be designated as an EAPC, because it is considered to be a benefit to elderly and less able people. Any twist and go vehicle that can achieve a speed above that will be classified as a moped. Also, an information plate defining what an EAPC is will be fitted on vehicles, so hopefully there will be no doubt about that."

from:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmgeneral/deleg6/150224/150224s01.htm

So it sounds promising, but of course what a politician says and what a politician does can be very different things.

I have been enjoying the good weather of late and made several visits to Willen Lake in Milton Keynes.

 

There has been a fair on for the school kids and it has been very busy with parents and toddlers.

 

My throttle and brake cut out switches have come to the fore allowing me to maintain full hand control and safely negotiate around them, something you can't do with a torque sensor as there are no brake cut out switches, the only option being is to switch off the assistance.

Me too, except the add-on electric propulsion to my wife's wheel chair will not exceed 4 mph so its the 3 yr old kids on scooters that have to watch out and slow down for us!

The throttle is being kept though isn't it? But the brands who want to sell them will just need type approval.

Let's be clear what we are talking about here. I see the following types of ebike (my own Taxonomy here):

A) Pedelecs. Design speed 15mph. Limited power. Motor control by Pedals only.

B) Pedelecs. Design speed 15mph. Limited power. Motor control by Pedals OR Throttle.

C) E-Moped. Design speed > 15mph. More Power. Motor control by throttle. TYPE APPROVAL NEEDED

D) E-Motor Bike.... TYPE APPROVAL NEEDED.

It's Class B) in my own taxonomy that I'm concerned about.

I don't see why something that is basically identical to Class A apart from the throttle, should be subject to different rules.

(edited to remove incorrect info re: requirements for insurance etc)

Class C, D etc yes. Class B no.

The average man in the street would not be able to tell Class A & B apart, so why the disproportionate legislation?

Edited August 12, 201510 yr by torrent99

Clare Perry: "There is one more point to respond to. The twist and go classifications will be permitted up to 15.5 mph. A vehicle under that limit will be designated as an EAPC, because it is considered to be a benefit to elderly and less able people. Any twist and go vehicle that can achieve a speed above that will be classified as a moped. Also, an information plate defining what an EAPC is will be fitted on vehicles, so hopefully there will be no doubt about that."

 

from:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmgeneral/deleg6/150224/150224s01.htm

 

So it sounds promising, but of course what a politician says and what a politician does can be very different things.

Clare Perry has kept that promise as KTM have said above, twist and go just needs to be type approved to keep within the law.

It's up to manufacturers and suppliers whether they become available type approved, Clare Perry cannot order them to market such machines, that depends upon there being a demand.

.

Clare Perry has kept that promise as KTM have said above, twist and go just needs to be type approved to keep within the law.

 

It's up to manufacturers and suppliers whether they become available type approved, Clare Perry cannot order them to market such machines, that depends upon there being a demand.

.

That's not how I read that quote. My reading of that quote says that throttle electric bikes (my class B above), will be treated the same as pedal electric bikes (my class A above) as they currently are.

To make them type-approved basically kills them, and is not fulfilling that promise. Or am I misunderstanding something about "type approved"?

That's not how I read that quote. My reading of that quote says that throttle electric bikes (my class B above), will be treated the same as pedal electric bikes (my class A above) as they currently are.

 

To make them type-approved basically kills them, and is not fulfilling that promise. Or am I misunderstanding something about "type approved"?

This is a confusion of marketing and usage. Clare has kept her word since in the UK and uniquely in the EU, anyone's usage of a type approved twist-and-go will be treated as pedelec riding. It's the makers who are affected by the type approval ruling, not you as a rider.

.

This is a confusion of marketing and usage. Clare has kept her word since in the UK and uniquely in the EU, anyone's usage of a type approved twist-and-go will be treated as pedelec riding. It's the makers who are affected by the type approval ruling, not you as a rider.

.

Well I am if the manufacturers can't (through an ill defined or excessive definition) or won't get type approved (due to cost). And of course as a self builder it's another problem still.

(And loathe as I am to mince words, she said that "A vehicle under that limit will be designated as an EAPC", not "A vehicle under that limit will be designated as a type approved moped, with the same rider restrictions as an EAPC" )

 

Class C, D etc yes. Class B no.

The average man in the street would not be able to tell Class A & B apart, so why the disproportionate legislation?

Baffled here too. You raise well the important point that if riders can't buy class B except at considerable extra cost because that's imposed on manufacturers, restricting market entry and competition,development and presence in the market, then in EU law jargon that surely undermines in substance, (and disproportionately as you rightly say)less able persons' enjoyment of their free movement of goods rights. That then must be justified by the body promulgating the measure as a justified,proportionate violation of the Treaties, but I don't think it can be.

(And loathe as I am to mince words, she said that "A vehicle under that limit will be designated as an EAPC", not "A vehicle under that limit will be designated as a type approved moped, with the same rider restrictions as an EAPC" )

I think you are splitting hairs. Clare was addressing the concerns expressed by some during the consultation that the DfT held, and those concerns were about usage. Twist-and-go are designated as EAPCs as far as riders are concerned.

The manufacture and supply is no business of owners and riders. If there is the demand that some of you seem to think there is, makers will be only too happy to jump in and supply models type approved. Just look at the past evidence.

When riders wanted more power the makers supplied us with nominal 250 watt machines even though they were strictly speaking illegal. When that wasn't sufficient for riders they increased the actual maximum motor power, even to beyond double the legal limit. When riders wanted more speed, makers supplied the e-bikes with off-road buttons or derestriction links.

If the demand is there for type approval, there will be type approved models on the market.

.

There you have it wrapped up in a nut shell fellow Pedelecers.

The manufacture and supply is no business of owners and riders. If there is the demand that some of you seem to think there is, makers will be only too happy to jump in and supply models type approved. Just look at the past evidence.

When riders wanted more power the makers supplied us with nominal 250 watt machines even though they were strictly speaking illegal. When that wasn't sufficient for riders they increased the actual maximum motor power, even to beyond double the legal limit. When riders wanted more speed, makers supplied the e-bikes with off-road buttons or derestriction links.

We don't know what we want, we have to leave the decisions to the manufacturers, if they want to place illegal bikes in the market and let you ride them illegally it is OK, until they had to back pedal and seek a get out of jail card from the DfT and woe betide you if you want a throttle, which is perfectly safe to use, you are going to have to pay extra for it.

Edited August 12, 201510 yr by shemozzle999

We don't know what we want

But that isn't true is it. All the foregoing posters wanting throttles clearly do know what they want.

There's nothing special about e-bikes, it's a demand and supply market like any other, if a demand exists there will be someone jumping in to supply it.

Nor will full throttle bikes be necessarily dearer, the price will depend on demand and the supply competition like any other market, and the cost of type approval is spread across all of the bikes sold so is minimal on each e-bike. Special e-bikes won't have to be produced, China's main market is the USA which is already a throttle market and they've already supplied us with them for many years, restricted to 15.5 mph.

.

I think you are splitting hairs. Clare was addressing the concerns expressed by some during the consultation that the DfT held, and those concerns were about usage. Twist-and-go are designated as EAPCs as far as riders are concerned.

.

Yes I was splitting hairs, but they are important hairs. This is the way politicians kill ideas whilst still maintaining they are providing their full backing for them. All that's required is to make the required type approval so onerous and expensive, and the whole class of bikes is effectively dead.

And as members who have gone through the current type approval process have shown, any ebike that can successfully pass the current standards will cease to look (& weigh) like an ordinary pedal cycle and will instead become practically a motor bike.

The manufacture and supply is no business of owners and riders. If there is the demand that some of you seem to think there is, makers will be only too happy to jump in and supply models type approved. Just look at the past evidence.

.

What past evidence? Manufacturers haven't needed to go through type approval to put/keep the throttle on. It's been an almost zero cost item so far. We don't know what will happen when they have to invest in type approval (but we can guess...)

Now practically, manufacturers may continue to supply "illegal" non-type approved throttle bikes (as they do "over powered" bikes now), but then the consequences could fall on the (unsuspecting) user....

]

I don't see why something that is basically identical to Class A apart from the throttle, should be subject to:

I) Compulsory Type Approval (cost to manufacturer, completely ill defined and possibly non-achievable with proposed regulations).

ii) Requirement for insurance.

ii) Requirement for motor bike style helmet.

iii) Unable to use cycle tracks.

iv) Unable to use cycle racks for parking.

v) License plate

etc etc.

The type approval in the new regulations is simply to conform to EU regulations, and the changes in the new type approval regulations ensure it will be easily achievable.

None of the other things listed are required in the new regulations since the e-bikes in question are being treated as EAPCs, so I don't know why you've posted this.

You seem to be looking for problems that don't exist.

.

What past evidence?

You are just being cussed, why ask me when I listed the past evidence of how makers react to demand, even where the demand is illegal. If there's a demand for full throttles and there is a legal path to supply, the makers will use it of course.

.

The type approval in the new regulations is simply to conform to EU regulations, and the changes in the new type approval regulations ensure it will be easily achievable.

 

None of the other things listed are required in the new regulations since the e-bikes in question are being treated as EAPCs, so I don't know why you've posted this.

 

You seem to be looking for problems that don't exist.

.

RE: Insurance etc. My apologies I stand corrected (I'll edit my post) thanks!

RE: Type approval why are throttle bikes called out as requiring type approval and non-throttle bikes not? Or is it that non-throttle bikes also require the same type approval and we are all debating about nothing?

(I'm hoping this is the case)

I have been enjoying the good weather of late and made several visits to Willen Lake in Milton Keynes.

 

There has been a fair on for the school kids and it has been very busy with parents and toddlers.

 

My throttle and brake cut out switches have come to the fore allowing me to maintain full hand control and safely negotiate around them, something you can't do with a torque sensor as there are no brake cut out switches, the only option being is to switch off the assistance.

This is the most dangerous argument for throttles that I've ever seen!

Basically you are saying that a bicycle is dangerous in the presence of pedestrians, since all bicycle control of power is though the pedals.

That has two implications:

First that all shared use paths should be discontinued with bicycles banned from them.

Second that if the problem is unique to e-bikes due to the power, then the power allowed at present is excessive and should be reduced to meet the requirement that they remain unregulated as bicycles.

.

RE: Type approval why are throttle bikes called out as requiring type approval and non-throttle bikes not?

They aren't, the EU says nothing whatsoever about throttles.

This situation arises since a pedelec is defined amongst other things as having assist power being controlled by the pedals. The reason is to keep them as close as possible to being normal bikes so that they don't have to have regulation of users.

Clearly a throttle controlled bike doesn't comply.

So faced with users asking for throttles, the DfT looked for a solution to please them. The only way to do that meant to borrow from the forthcoming L1e-A class of moped regulation for the UK. Basically they are making a local UK rule that if we meet the requirement for type appoval as L1e-A they will still say that the e-bike is a pedelec, bending the rules which they can do.

The awkwardness is due to the division of usage and supply in EU law. Usage is to a fair extent under the control of national governments so ours can say how we use a pedelec. But for someone to supply a pedelec and say it's a pedelec (EAPC) to sell it, it has to have power controlled by the pedals, and our government cannot rule any different.

.

Edited August 12, 201510 yr by flecc

what is the legal position of the owner who purchases a thumb throttle on ebay and fits it to his legal e-bike? can he be fined and how much?

They are liable for all the penalties applicable to using a non-type approved, unregistered, unlicenced, uninsured motor vehicle, and possibly without an appropriate driving licence*.

The total financial penalties could be costly and penalty points for being uninsured will be applied to any present or future driving licence.

That's with the present laws of course. The same may or may not apply after 31st December 2016, since the DfT may have further regularised their ruling on type approval by then which could reduce the scale of possible charges.

* Possibly because they may already have an appropriate licence or be exempted by the licence age.

.

Edited August 12, 201510 yr by flecc