Petition to increase speed assist limit on E bikes

Michael Price

Pedelecer
Sep 7, 2018
218
147
I don't like how this thread is taking a path of dividing people on bikes into different groups and presenting some as good and others as bad.

We all use bikes for all kinds of reasons and we shouldn't assume that someone wanting to go fast on a bike and wear a certain type of clothing is inherently wrong or is in some way bad.

I admire the way that some people can zip along at 30mph under their own steam and I also marvel at the 80 year old who every day steadily does the 10 mile trip from his home to town and back.

Neither is good or bad, they are just doing what suits their situation. There should be enough acceptance that people on bikes are all different and have different needs and therefore space should be made for them.
Hmmm

Ok - maybe I have given the wrong impression - if so then I apologise
In my opinion anyone who can keep any bike running along fast enough to past 'me on my ebike' with ease has my respect
Even if they are on an expensive road bike, riding on the drops and wearing Lycra - well done! - keep it up - wich I could join you
But - basically - I can;t be bothered to do the training!
but if you have the dedication to do it - good on you!!

To me the important thing is to encourage people onto the road on bikes - well road, paths, tracks and whatever.
Especially anyone who can ditch a car - for at least part of the journey - and commute by bike/ebike - that will benefit everyone - thanks to anyone who has done this

And - the more people that cycle regularly then the healthier the people of the country will be - even on an ebike you are using energy and getting fresh air - which is good for you

And, of course, from a selfish point of view - the more people there are cycling then the more politicians - local and national - will listen to us and improve things like cycle paths and secure cycle parking - so then more people think about cycling - so they listen more - and so on

I would be amzed if we end up like the famous Dutch - but maybe a bit???

so whoever you are - if you use a bike - that's great


just PLEASE - don't ride around here at night with no lights wearing black and whizz diagonally across the road 5 foot in front of my car - it worries me!!!!
 

Chris200

Pedelecer
Apr 29, 2019
26
14
This has nothing to do with the petition but is just a bit of musing...

So Two things....

Firstly, I can cycle over the limit without any assistance so although I am ok with playing by the rules I am also happy to be honest and say I think the rules are entirely stupid. I often cycle my fully loaded (un powered) touring bike faster than the ebike limit which makes me just as dangerous. So logically speaking why is there not a limit for all bikes? is the law saying that it is not ok for less fit people to cycle a bit over 15.5 mph? I accept a limit is needed but honestly 15.5 mph is a joke. Would 20 not be more reasonable?

Secondly, I agree that cars are subject to rules that bikes are not and that at a certain point vehicles need to be regulated. But to argue that we get a fair deal is patent rubbish. Cars weigh vastly more and can range enormously in power output to 100's of horse power. There is no comparison to be had between an e bike and a car. I can go out tomorrow and buy a Mercedes with 600 horse power and all I have to do is stick to the speed limit even though the car is capable of 200mph. I am trusted to be a good person even though I have the capability to cause horrific accidents. Essentialy I believe that there should be a speed limit for ebikes but not a power limit. Yes at a certain point they would need to be subject to regulation but honestly does anyone really think the average e bike Comes anywhere near that point? Also mot'd/ insured or not a car can easily break national speed limits by many mph

Saying we should keep our heads down and count ourselves v lucky is just a cop out. Why not argue for a sensible compromise? I use an ebike for hauling things, tools etc. I want power and a 250w motor doesn't cut it. So why not limit the speed but not the power? Limit assisted speed to 20mph simply because most people are capable of cycling at 20mph (at some point and much more downhill) anyway and why should they HAVE to push through the drag of a motor. And yes if you want more than that then regulate it. Basically I think the rules are badly thought out, will stop certain growth areas in ebikes such as cargo bikes and essentialy punish and limit a group of people who present nowhere near the risk that cars do. There has to be a better compromise and it won't happen if cyclists just meekly accept what their 'allowed'...

Oh and just to add....there would definitely have to be a conversation about what's allowed on cycle paths. Personally I don't use the pavement ones with my ebike or normal. I'm happy to leave them to pedestrians and make the point that v halving a pavement is not a solution to needing proper cycle lanes!
 
Last edited:

Michael Price

Pedelecer
Sep 7, 2018
218
147
This has nothing to do with the petition but is just a bit of musing...

So Two things....

Firstly, I can cycle over the limit without any assistance so although I am ok with playing by the rules I am also happy to be honest and say I think the rules are entirely stupid. I often cycle my fully loaded (un powered) touring bike faster than the ebike limit which makes me just as dangerous. So logically speaking why is there not a limit for all bikes? is the law saying that it is not ok for less fit people to cycle a bit over 15.5 mph? I accept a limit is needed but honestly 15.5 mph is a joke. Would 20 not be more reasonable?

Secondly, I agree that cars are subject to rules that bikes are not and that at a certain point vehicles need to be regulated. But to argue that we get a fair deal is patent rubbish. Cars weigh vastly more and can range enormously in power output to 100's of horse power. There is no comparison to be had between an e bike and a car. I can go out tomorrow and buy a Mercedes with 600 horse power and all I have to do is stick to the speed limit even though the car is capable of 200mph. I am trusted to be a good person even though I have the capability to cause horrific accidents. Essentialy I believe that there should be a speed limit for ebikes but not a power limit. Yes at a certain point they would need to be subject to regulation but honestly does anyone really think the average e bike Comes anywhere near that point? Also mot'd/ insured or not a car can easily break national speed limits by many mph

Saying we should keep our heads down and count ourselves v lucky is just a cop out. Why not argue for a sensible compromise? I use an ebike for hauling things, tools etc. I want power and a 250w motor doesn't cut it. So why not limit the speed but not the power? Limit assisted speed to 20mph simply because most people are capable of cycling at 20mph (at some point and much more downhill) anyway and why should they HAVE to push through the drag of a motor. And yes if you want more than that then regulate it. Basically I think the rules are badly thought out, will stop certain growth areas in ebikes such as cargo bikes and essentialy punish and limit a group of people who present nowhere near the risk that cars do. There has to be a better compromise and it won't happen if cyclists just meekly accept what their 'allowed'...

Oh and just to add....there would definitely have to be a conversation about what's allowed on cycle paths. Personally I don't use the pavement ones with my ebike or normal. I'm happy to leave them to pedestrians and make the point that v halving a pavement is not a solution to needing proper cycle lanes!
a good post - I would agree with most of it

except one point

I do not think MOST people are capable of pedalling a normal bike at 20 mph on the flat on a windless day
maybe for a short time witha lot of effort4
but not constantly


YES - your average club member who cycles most days in a sessions that could be referred to as 'training' could probably do so for an extended period
but the average person with a bike who 'goes on bike rides' - no - I don't think this is the case
certainly around here I pass most people on non-road bikes when doing 15.5 mph - most 'mountain bike' types and hybrids are going at somewhere between 10 and 15.
Often fit/younger looking people are a pain as they are doing JUST below the speed I normally go and I end up knocking the assist down to Eco - or OFF so I don't pass them and then HAVE to worry about them passing me back again.
But - from my experience - in this area - normal people ride below 15 mph

YMMV
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
46,868
23,936
But - from my experience - in this area - normal people ride below 15 mph
And so did all the British years ago, I know because I was there and in the trade. That was when more than half of Britain cycled before widespread motor vehicle ownership. Almost all of the rest of the world still chooses to cycle that way.

It's only since about 1980 and returning to some cycling that the British have adopted a pseudo racing style of cycling, instead of riding at circa 10 to 12 mph as they once almost all did.

You are absolutely right, below 15 mph is the cycling norm, but for the silly fashion for riding sport style with considerable effort that many in this country have adopted.
.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chris200

Chris200

Pedelecer
Apr 29, 2019
26
14
a good post - I would agree with most of it

except one point

I do not think MOST people are capable of pedalling a normal bike at 20 mph on the flat on a windless day
maybe for a short time witha lot of effort4
but not constantly


YES - your average club member who cycles most days in a sessions that could be referred to as 'training' could probably do so for an extended period
but the average person with a bike who 'goes on bike rides' - no - I don't think this is the case
certainly around here I pass most people on non-road bikes when doing 15.5 mph - most 'mountain bike' types and hybrids are going at somewhere between 10 and 15.
Often fit/younger looking people are a pain as they are doing JUST below the speed I normally go and I end up knocking the assist down to Eco - or OFF so I don't pass them and then HAVE to worry about them passing me back again.
But - from my experience - in this area - normal people ride below 15 mph

YMMV
Agreed:) . I don't think everyone is capable of constantly pushing a bike along at 20mph either. My point was that some people can, many people can for periods of time and almost anyone can cycle over 20mph down a hill. And in comparison to cars, well all most all modern cars are capable of vastly exceeding any speed limit..., so the 15mph limit is just silly. It's subjective but I would call for a 20 mph speed limit and 500w power limit. The great thing about self builds is you can programme your own Pas levels... My Pas 1 is set to cut out at 15mph and peaks at about 200w... When I'm in town that's where I leave it outside of urban areas I use higher Pas levels where I need them...a judgment call that I think it's roughly in line with how I use a car.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: trevor brooker

Chris200

Pedelecer
Apr 29, 2019
26
14
Actually when I think about it you could have a two tier system the same as for cars. 15.5 in town and whatever outside of town... This is how it goes for cars, they are capable of exceeding 30mph but expected to respect the limit. So just have a set of limits that are suitable for ebikes. I'm happy to stick to 15.5 in town and if I could use what extra power I have to get up hills (whilst obeying the limit) then why not.

Could you imagined if cars were limited in the same way as ebikes. Jeremy Clarkson would blow a valve! Every time you got to 70 on the motorway the engine cuts out...
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: trevor brooker

Nealh

Esteemed Pedelecer
Aug 7, 2014
12,314
4,795
57
West Sx RH
Downhill on a decent stretch not uncommon for me to hit up to 50mph.
 

Ocsid

Esteemed Pedelecer
Aug 2, 2017
253
183
77
Hampshire
I don't think the issue revolves around higher speeds on roads, but in areas shared with pedestrians, shopper, those stopped in conversations and where children, dogs, strollers etc are found?

Whilst Chris only uses roads, many others do use non road areas where cycling, though not cars, is presently both allowed and encouraged.

For those who are happy just to use the roads, there is already in place a legal alternative provision to exceed the preserves of pedelecs with their 25 kpm limit, and unpowered cycles.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: flecc

Chris200

Pedelecer
Apr 29, 2019
26
14
Actually when I think about it you could have a two tier system the same as for cars 15.5 in town and whatever outside of town...
I don't think the issue revolves around higher speeds on roads, but in areas shared with pedestrians, shopper, those stopped in conversations and where children, dogs, strollers etc are found?

Whilst Chris only uses roads, many others do use non road areas where cycling, though not cars, is presently both allowed and encouraged.

For those who are happy just to use the roads, there is already in place a legal alternative provision to exceed the preserves of pedelecs with their 25 kpm limit, and unpowered cycles.
yes, agreed. But then is it not the same as for cars? N which case a staggered speed limit for different areas depending on risk madness sense. I have to drive at 60 on dual carriageways when I am doing delivery driving in my van. The van can do upward of 100 but I am trusted to obey the rules and don't have to have a limiter that cuts the engine out. If there was the opportunity I would argue for cyclists to be given the same freedom.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: trevor brooker

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
46,868
23,936
yes, agreed. But then is it not the same as for cars? N which case a staggered speed limit for different areas depending on risk madness sense. I have to drive at 60 on dual carriageways when I am doing delivery driving in my van. The van can do upward of 100 but I am trusted to obey the rules and don't have to have a limiter that cuts the engine out. If there was the opportunity I would argue for cyclists to be given the same freedom.
Chris, you are wasting your time and effort, just like all those before you arguing the same ways over the 14 year life of this forum. The two fundamental reasons are simple.

Firstly, forget cars, they are completely irrelevant and no government will take any notice of such arguments. Motor vehicles are driven by people who have been tested for their competence, who are licenced to drive and in or on vehicles that are registered and traceable.

Bicycles including pedelecs are legally ridden by almost anyone, including anti-social deviants and nut cases who, without licencing, registration or number plates are completely untraceable. A huge and all important difference.

Secondly, most of what you want the government has already provided. Want more power to pull those heavy tools? Fine, the L1e-A bicycle based class is allowed four times the pedelec power rating at 1000 watts. Want more speed permitted to enable 20mph? Fine, the S class high speed pedelec allows up to 28 mph assisted and with the bonus of double the power at 500 watts to enable the extra speeds.

So obviously the government will continue to ignore the arguments of those like you, because all you are really saying is, I want to be able to ignore the law because my powered bicycle has a different name.

You must face the facts, all other motorised vehicles capable of 15 mph or more are classified as motor vehicles requiring registration, insurance and driving licences.

Uniquely our pedelecs can also be motor assisted at 15 mph without those, making us very lucky indeed. The only other road going motorised vehicles allowed to escape those restrictions are mobility vehicles restricted to 8 mph and pedestrian controlled vehicles restricted to 4 mph, so you can see just how lucky.
.
 

Chris200

Pedelecer
Apr 29, 2019
26
14
Chris, you are wasting your time and effort, just like all those before you arguing the same ways over the 14 year life of this forum. The two fundamental reasons are simple.

Firstly, forget cars, they are completely irrelevant and no government will take any notice of such arguments. Motor vehicles are driven by people who have been tested for their competence, who are licenced to drive and in or on vehicles that are registered and traceable.

Bicycles including pedelecs are legally ridden by almost anyone, including anti-social deviants and nut cases who, without licencing, registration or number plates are completely untraceable. A huge and all important difference.

Secondly, most of what you want the government has already provided. Want more power to pull those heavy tools? Fine, the L1e-A bicycle based class is allowed four times the pedelec power rating at 1000 watts. Want more speed permitted to enable 20mph? Fine, the S class high speed pedelec allows up to 28 mph assisted and with the bonus of double the power at 500 watts to enable the extra speeds.

So obviously the government will continue to ignore the arguments of those like you, because all you are really saying is, I want to be able to ignore the law because my powered bicycle has a different name.

You must face the facts, all other motorised vehicles capable of 15 mph or more are classified as motor vehicles requiring registration, insurance and driving licences.

Uniquely our pedelecs can also be motor assisted at 15 mph without those, making us very lucky indeed. The only other road going motorised vehicles allowed to escape those restrictions are mobility vehicles restricted to 8 mph and pedestrian controlled vehicles restricted to 4 mph, so you can see just how lucky.
.
I'm not wasting time :) I am simply pontificating about how in an ideal world the rules would make sense to me in my opinion and I'm interested in what others think. I disagree with you that what I'm saying is that I want permission to break the rules because my vehicle has a different name. I'm saying 'as a point of interest' that I think the rules as they are, are silly. I beleive a lot of people in the industry also think so other wise they wouldn't be playing the games that they do regarding peak power etc.... If we don't discuss things then how would anything ever change... I'm pretty sure there are many examples of this throughout history.
 

Chris200

Pedelecer
Apr 29, 2019
26
14
And just to add..actually my main point is about the power issue. If I registered a cargo bike that was over the 250w limit for its ability to haul things not to go fast...I would have to wear a helmet, have insurance, have a number plate etc etc...in my opinion it's completely over the top. When Large groups of people break rules iris often because the rules don't make sense.
 

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
5,550
1,684
And just to add..actually my main point is about the power issue. If I registered a cargo bike that was over the 250w limit for its ability to haul things not to go fast...I would have to wear a helmet, have insurance, have a number plate etc etc...in my opinion it's completely over the top. When Large groups of people break rules iris often because the rules don't make sense.
Mmm. The rules already make sense. If you want to be powered over the 15.5 mph limit buy a moped or fire blade, register it, insure and tax it..
As far as emtb is concerned, even with limit I have doubled my average speeds. On roads the 15 5 mph limit is perfect for climbing ( don't think raising limit will actually increase anyone's speed uphill. But downhill you can go to road speed limit.. So, I, m not sure raising powered limit would help that much on your average speeds,but it would and should attract tax, insurance, and registration and in bargain probably reduce your range by a third.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: TedG and flecc

Ocsid

Esteemed Pedelecer
Aug 2, 2017
253
183
77
Hampshire
But downhill you can go to road speed limit..
Whilst I agree with your general point, being pedantic, with your legal e-bike or a push bike you are not limited to the "road speed limit". That is specifically for a motor vehicle, which a bike is not and a "legal" e-bike is also not in the eyes of the law. Well, it is till somebody shakes the cage once too much.
 
Last edited:

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
46,868
23,936
I'm not wasting time :) I am simply pontificating about how in an ideal world the rules would make sense to me in my opinion and I'm interested in what others think. I disagree with you that what I'm saying is that I want permission to break the rules because my vehicle has a different name. I'm saying 'as a point of interest' that I think the rules as they are, are silly. I beleive a lot of people in the industry also think so other wise they wouldn't be playing the games that they do regarding peak power etc.... If we don't discuss things then how would anything ever change... I'm pretty sure there are many examples of this throughout history.
Then I could express it as you are being unrealistic. For starters it is completely untrue that many in the industry are in favour, indeed I know of all those who are opposed to any change. Some were in favour of the S class being adopted as well as the pedelec one, and the government granted their wish, subject to all the motor vehicle rules, but most are not producing them, such is their lack of interest in more speed.

It's also nonsense to say the industry are playing with the power rules, they most certainly are not. In the technical document EN15194 the authorities have laid down the basics while recognising there's no realistic way of assessing actual motor power at the wheel when the rider has to be pedalling as well according to law. How much is coming from the rider, how much from the motor? So the document only gives how to ensure a 250 watt rated motor can actually deliver that much to meet the rating. That it's not too much much more is only covered by a rather crude acceleration test to give a guesstimate, so basically the law leaves it to the designer to assess how much power is necessary and the natural limitation of how much battery a cyclist can carry with them.

In practice i can tell you of where both the designers and the wider public have chosen to have less power than the law allows. That the authorities don't care much about the power was shown by the European Parliament recommending to the Commission that all power limitation be dropped for pedelecs. That wasn't actioned but nor was it argued against.

To argue this subject Chris it's necessary to have a far greater picture of what is going on. For example you are probably unaware that this subject is and has long been under discussion by committees almost continuously. Those taking part are representatives of governments including the EU, their transport departments and organisations, powered two and three wheeled motorised vehicle producers and safety organisations.

Of course there is conflict between the producers in those. For example the moped/scooter manufacturers are firmly against pedelecs making any inroads on their market so strongly oppose any pedelec liberalisation of speed or any other advantage. An example is that our desire to have throttles they blocked with spurious safety arguments, so we haven't got them legally while remaining classified as bicycles without all the regulations.

You can see from this that the public play no direct part in the decisions, since it's the governments present who we vote for who represent us there. They will only argue for higher speeds if their public wants them, and overwhelmingly their publics don't.

Ergo, your arguments, however rational they might seem to you, are doomed to fall upon deaf ears.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TedG and richtea99

Chris200

Pedelecer
Apr 29, 2019
26
14
Then I could express it as you are being unrealistic. For starters it is completely untrue that many in the industry are in favour, indeed I know of all those who are opposed to any change. Some were in favour of the S class being adopted as well as the pedelec one, and the government granted their wish, subject to all the motor vehicle rules, but most are not producing them, such is their lack of interest in more speed.

It's also nonsense to say the industry are playing with the power rules, they most certainly are not. In the technical document EN15194 the authorities have laid down the basics while recognising there's no realistic way of assessing actual motor power at the wheel when the rider has to be pedalling as well according to law. How much is coming from the rider, how much from the motor? So the document only gives how to ensure a 250 watt rated motor can actually deliver that much to meet the rating. That it's not too much much more is only covered by a rather crude acceleration test to give a guesstimate, so basically the law leaves it to the designer to assess how much power is necessary and the natural limitation of how much battery a cyclist can carry with them.

In practice i can tell you of where both the designers and the wider public have chosen to have less power than the law allows. That the authorities don't care much about the power was shown by the European Parliament recommending to the Commission that all power limitation be dropped for pedelecs. That wasn't actioned but nor was it argued against.

To argue this subject Chris it's necessary to have a far greater picture of what is going on. For example you are probably unaware that this subject is and has long been under discussion by committees almost continuously. Those taking part are representatives of governments including the EU, their transport departments and organisations, powered two and three wheeled motorised vehicle producers and safety organisations.

Of course there is conflict between the producers in those. For example the moped/scooter manufacturers are firmly against pedelecs making any inroads on their market so strongly oppose any pedelec liberalisation of speed or any other advantage. An example is that our desire to have throttles they blocked with spurious safety arguments, so we haven't got them legally while remaining classified as bicycles without all the regulations.

You can see from this that the public play no direct part in the decisions, since it's the governments present who we vote for who represent us there. They will only argue for higher speeds if their public wants them, and overwhelmingly their publics don't.

Ergo, your arguments, however rational they might seem to you, are doomed to fall upon deaf ears.
.
I am simply interested in opinions. Not making a case to the government. So deaf ears or not I don't really care. For me it is an interesting topic that bears some discusion. So do you think as things stand that the rules make sense or seem fair? If so why? And if not why? What would you keep or change etc. And what's of real interest to me is do you think that the regulations that apply when you register an overpowered ebike are just a touch over the top? It seems to me that they are such not because of safety issues but more likely because of pressure from motoring and insurance groups who perceive the while industry as a threat.

Within the motor vehicle group there are different categories so it is possible to look at each mode of transport in its own right. Tractors, mopeds, tow trucks. Different speed limits etc. Some of which do not have to be MOT'd at all but all of which involve some form of trust that you will comply to the specific rules. So why not apply the same trust to ebikes along side a more nuanced categorisation system. I'd be happy to live with some regulation if it wasn't imho over the top and unfair. I have a feeling that at least some of the situation is created by an age old dislike and misunderstanding of the cycling demographic. That and disinterest in a minority transport group.

I am fully aware that these things are under discusion by committees, I have followed it with interest. In my own industry we have had to argue against crippling health and safety restrictions so I know well how if things get if left to the buearocrats.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
46,868
23,936
And just to add..actually my main point is about the power issue. If I registered a cargo bike that was over the 250w limit for its ability to haul things not to go fast...I would have to wear a helmet, have insurance, have a number plate etc etc...in my opinion it's completely over the top. When Large groups of people break rules iris often because the rules don't make sense.
To a limited extent I agree Chris, but would add two words to your post:

- - - - - - because the rules don't make sense to me.

You see they do make sense to the government. There was once a time when with only 8% of the present number of vehicles we killed over 6000 people a year on our roads. Worldwide the death total was horrific, like a major war every year. So the UN and the EU acted to force nations to address this and kept on the tails of governments to shame them into solving the problem, and it worked. Now with twelve times as many vehicles we typically kill well under a third as many and worldwide many millions have been saved since.

We in Britain are the top nation with by far the least deaths/serious injuries/accidents pro rata to population in the world. The government is understandably very proud of that of course and won't do anything that might affect that, hence our somewhat nanny state road laws and those making sense to them.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deus and Chris200

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
46,868
23,936
I am simply interested in opinions. Not making a case to the government. So deaf ears or not I don't really care. For me it is an interesting topic that bears some discusion.
Having been around for so long, to me the discussion that's been going on for 70 years has been done to death. You've said you feel that discussion could lead to some easement of the regulations but are probably not aware that happened long ago.

When I joined the trade 70 years ago and was fitting assist motors to bikes, I also had to fit a rear number plate and tax disc holder. The customer had to have or get a full motorcycle driving licence and third party insurance. That really was over the top.

But when we joined the EEC / EU in the 1970s with their greater tolerance we were able to lose those on electric assist powered bikes, though our government then insisted on a 12 mph assist limit and a strict actual 200 watts limit which was a market killer. However, arguing the case led to us getting a 15 mph assist limit in the new 1983 regulations, albeit still with the fairly useless 200 watts and soon followed with a ban on under 14s riding pedelecs when parliament found out they could. We are still the only country in Europe with such an age ban which is totally unnecessary. Finally in 2015 we gained our last easements, a tiny rise to 15.5 mph assist, a liberal nominal 250 watts and a removal of all weight limits, all to match the EU. But once again those came with loss, this time a ban on throttles.

You can see how it goes, every time we get any gain we get accompanying losses, and that's why we are nervous of change and why we post, "Be careful what you wish for".

So do you think as things stand that the rules make sense or seem fair? If so why? And if not why? What would you keep or change etc.
They are certainly fair since no-one gets any advantage. They make sense in the safety context that I explained in my last post, but not from a user point of view. There I'd like to see the law clearer in allowing more power and more emphasis on leaving that to the designer. Some blame applies to the producers though, since they could already allow more but don't in the interests of range, but it has to be remembered that most of the ebike world don't want more power or speed. Even if we got them would the industry produce and deliver for our tiny UK market if they weren't what others in our vicinity used. An example is New Zealand where long ago they decided on a 300 watts rating, but no manufacturer has ever produced a 300 watt bike for them!

And what's of real interest to me is do you think that the regulations that apply when you register an overpowered ebike are just a touch over the top? It seems to me that they are such not because of safety issues but more likely because of pressure from motoring and insurance groups who perceive the while industry as a threat.
I've largely answered this. They are over the top from a user point of view, but the laws on all the surrounding classes leave them trapped where they are. They can only change if all the others change and I don't buy your arguments about fragmenting the law for all the vehicle types. That can work for vehicles with very different purposes, but not for those with the same purpose, e.g. moped and e-bikes, both used for personal transport.
.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
46,868
23,936
I am simply interested in opinions.
Back again Chris to specifically satisfy your interest with opinions.

From 2006 we had been pressurising the DfT on the whole gamut of e-bike legal matters, so eventually in 2011 the DfT decided on a public consultation on the issues. This was publicised widely in cycling circles, including this forum with well over 10,000 members at the time, the CTC and the trade. It was open for representations for 12 weeks but the response numbers were so poor that this was extended for late submissions.

Eventually only 35 members of the public responded from the whole of Great Britain, (Northern Ireland in the UK has transport devolved) showing just how little interest anyone had in changing the laws. I'm linking below the archived record of that consultation for you to read, since out of it came our current law revisions.

.
 

Wicky

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 12, 2014
2,751
3,863
Colchester, Essex
www.jhepburn.co.uk
And just to add..actually my main point is about the power issue. If I registered a cargo bike that was over the 250w limit for its ability to haul things not to go fast...I would have to wear a helmet, have insurance, have a number plate etc etc...in my opinion it's completely over the top. When Large groups of people break rules iris often because the rules don't make sense.
Same if you bought a 50cc moped with a top box - you'd have to wear a helmet, tax MOT etc.

 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: TedG and flecc