Fair point, which is why I thought to use peak output, as this is easier to determine than the current rules which talk about continuous power output, which is a term that can be played around with somewhat. I wasn't proposing this as a means to enable e-bikes to become unlicenced speed machines, simply as a way of providing a clear deliniation.

its a bit like the national speed limit,currently 70mph but upto 80mph you won't get stopped or fined but if you up it to 80mph it will either be zero tolerance or an actual 90mph before slapped wrists....the same applies to ebikes..whatever limit there is somebody will always want to take it that little bit further....and the consequences of unisured ebikes bombing around everywhere doesn't bear thinking about.....unless.........it is a direct replacement of cars.....

Edited November 5, 200916 yr by carpetbagger

I too like the rules as they are and will only shift that view if e-bikes become a large scale market in the UK.

 

My reasoning is that as things stand, considerable licence can be and is taken with power outputs without anyone in authority noticing, or where they do notice, not bothering to do anything about it as with the "off-road" buttons they don't do anything about.

 

This way I can have my "250 watt" rated production e-bike which in reality is capable of well over 700 watts of continuous power from the whole of the battery charge without technical problems or interference from the authorities. And that one horsepower is good enough for one adult any day as horses regularly demonstrate.

 

Of course if e-bikes ever become a major market with very large numbers on the road, that will change and action will be taken to enforce the regulations, so it would be then when I'd back efforts for change.

.

Regulations

 

As a matter of interest, I have nothing against the Metro and believe that it is far safer at 20mph than a moped is at 30, however as we all know, if there is a bad accident which involves publicity the anti electric bike guys will be on us like a ton of bricks.

 

Before anyone says there can't be anyone who would oppose electric bikes, there is a very powerful motorbike lobby against them, hence all the messing about with throttles and pedals etc. Unfortunately there is huge vested interest in keeping IC engined bikes on the road burning fuel, these guys would love the chance to find somthing concrete against E Bikes.

 

Bikes that travel faster than 17/18mph (the EN regs leave us a 10% deviation either side of 15.5mph) or that have a throttle that works above 3mph without the pedals turning do not conform and really should not be sold without type approval, insurance, tax, MOT etc. As you all know I am not against pushing the boundaries a little however the Metro does look and feel much more like moped than a bicycle. I am horribly afraid it will cause us all problems unless the Ultra Motor guys restrict the Metro to perform to the letter of the law of course if they did that who would buy one?

 

Tricky!

 

All the best David

Edited November 5, 200916 yr by Wisper Bikes

Hi all,

 

I'm sure the full ETRA proposal has been published on the forum somewhere (I haven't looked). It would seem to match most of your views - i.e. max powered speed unchanged at 25kmh but increasing the max rating of the motor to 500 watts - as a definition of the regs under which an electric bike will be classified as a pedal cycle without the need for type approval.

 

Furthermore ETRA proposes the introduction of a new category (as a subdivision of the current moped category) for pedal cycles which will require type approval - with max rated motor power of 1kw and a max powered speed of 45kmh. Currently in the UK these would carry the same licensing, insurance, tax etc rules as for Cat L mopeds – this category is primarily to add clarity to current rules and encourage product development in an area the technology is ready to support.

 

Of course these proposals are taking a wide view (Europe, US and Canada) so are very likely to be subject to local amendment.

 

Certainly a step in the right direction and industry driven (Europe really leading the way due to the size of the market already).

Yes, David published the ETRA proposals in full on earlier threads Steve:

 

ETRA 1

 

ETRA 2

.

Thanks flecc, I was sure they'd be here somewhere.

All the best.

Etra

 

Hi Steve I posted them a few weeks ago, I will dig them up for you.

 

Have you seen this man!

 

[ATTACH]986.vB[/ATTACH]

 

All the best

 

David

Quick

 

Yes, David published the ETRA proposals in full on earlier threads Steve:

 

ETRA 1

 

ETRA 2

.

 

Too quick for me Flecc!

 

Thanks.

 

All the best

 

David

Never seen him before in my life!

 

Is it The Hood?!

????

 

Or even The Stigg!

 

All the best

 

David

Welcome to the Forum!

 

Your knowledge of electric bikes will be invaluable!

 

I agree the Metro is a great machine lots of fun, but should we be promoting bikes that patently do not conform to the European standards? My worry is when one of these 40kg bikes hits a child at over 20mph, and it will happen, the whole electric bike industry will suffer.

 

I have to dig out the report somewhere but this is exactly why Singapore's Land Transport Authority clamped down on e-bikes a few years back and reduced the max power to 200W.

 

Singapore's close links with China meant a lot of 48V 1000W Chinese e-bikes ended up being imported and ridden on the shared use paths of that crowded and dense country - a few nasty collisions occured, people were injured and a clampdown was the result. For good measure, the LTA also permanently banned on environmental grounds all those petrol powered bike/moped hybrids that Flecc often refers to, which were apparently still popular with old Chinese men. All these had to be taken off the road and weighed in (the bikes, not the old Chinese men!)

 

It also pushed the hand of neighbouring Malaysia to implement stringent rules to the point my uncle said he thought e-bikes were illegal there - although I think they are now licensed with type approval providing they comply with power rules.

 

But it certainly did cost all the e-bike businesses thousands and hold back the industry for a few years (and of course the numbers of Japanese mopeds there have not dwindled much..)

200w

 

Thanks Alex, for putting the argument so succinctly.

 

This is exactly my concern, if we don't work within the law we could quickly find ourselves in much the same position.

 

Best regards

 

David

 

Have you seen this man!

 

[ATTACH]986[/ATTACH]

 

All the best

 

David

 

Kinda looks like Heston Blumenthal, the chef.

I saw my first A2B Metro in Canterbury this morning, definitely one for wannabe motorcyclists . Being a wannabe cyclist myself I prefer my Powabyke X6

 

I have has my A2B for a few weeks now and I am far from a wannabe motorcyclist but a real motorcyclist. I think this is why i dont like the front hub powerd bikes as well. The A2B suits my jouney , I spent the last year on a WISPER 905se which I loved but allthough the range is much further on that the power of the A2B allows me to keep with the traffic on a couple of big junctions/ roundabouts.

I'd like to have a spin on 1 of those A2Bs. Don't reckon it's keep up with mine though but it's definitely prettier

 

Don't worry this fine piece of machinery doesn't live in the UK and it's soon to follow offspring will be far easier on the eye.

The point about keeping up with traffic on large (dangerous) roundabouts is salient imho. There are routes I take where I will only use the Torq 1,because if I pedal hell for leather,I can keepmy speed around 26mph, which is seemingly just sufficient to stop impatient motorists attempting dangerous manouevres (dangerous for me at least), whereas on my Cytronex,I can only sustain around 22mph. At this speed I am apparently fair game. Maybe the off-road buttons should be re-labelled as 'life-preserver'

Keeping up

 

I totally agree with you, this is one of the ebike arguments regarding the safety aspect pf ebikes over pedal bikes.

 

My point is that we have rules issued by the EU and if we don't stick to them we are in serious danger of loosing our fantastic position of being treated as a push bike in the eyes of the law and legislators.

 

I agree that more powerful electric bikes are brilliant and will certainly have a place on the road, however these will fall into a separate category where the laws applying to mopeds will and should apply.

 

All the best David

My point is that we have rules issued by the EU and if we don't stick to them we are in serious danger of loosing our fantastic position of being treated as a push bike in the eyes of the law and legislators.

 

Exactly!

 

Being able to use our assisted bikes on one way roads via special lanes in Cambridge, cycle paths and routes means my commute to work is faster and more relaxing than driving.

 

Regards

 

Jerry

I totally agree with you, this is one of the ebike arguments regarding the safety aspect pf ebikes over pedal bikes.

 

As long as Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles (EAPCs) are at least as safe a unasisted pedal cycles then the safety argument isn't valid.

 

The rationale behind the rules that allow EPACs to avoid being treated as "motor vehicals" dispite the fact they are vehicals that are motorised is that they are so like unassisted pedal cycles that they may as well be treated as such. For an ebike to be significantly safer than unassisted bikes it would have to out perform them to an extent that would make it significantly different from them, which would undermine this rationale.

 

The safey argument can be used to support the establishment of a low-powered-scooter type class of ebikes, but if you want your machine enjoy the legal benifits of being practically like an unuassisted bike you can't then ask for it to be different from unassisted bikes.

 

Which does make life tricky for ebike manufacturers, on the one hand they need to market their product on the basis of how different from unassisted bikes they are, on they other hand they need the legislators to keep thinking that their their product are so alike to unassisted bikes that they can be treated in the same way.

As long as Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles (EAPCs) are at least as safe a unasisted pedal cycles then the safety argument isn't valid.

 

The rationale behind the rules that allow EPACs to avoid being treated as "motor vehicals" dispite the fact they are vehicals that are motorised is that they are so like unassisted pedal cycles that they may as well be treated as such. For an ebike to be significantly safer than unassisted bikes it would have to out perform them to an extent that would make it significantly different from them, which would undermine this rationale.

 

I agree with the logic behind this Patrick, but an e-bike can be, and is, safer than an unassisted bike while still being just like an unassisted bike under some circumstances.

 

For example, having the power assistance can enable higher uphill speeds when seated but which are still cycling speeds commensurate with those commonplace on the flat for an equivalent unassisted bike. That's safer since it means less vehicles overtake on the hill during the climb and the common cyclist climb problem of "weaving" at very low climb speeds is largely eliminated.

 

An unassisted cyclist standing on the pedals can gain equivalent extra speed when climbing but arguably not with the same safety gain, neither the incline or standing on the pedals really being relevant to this matter except in a pedantic sense.

 

I agree of course that any higher speeds and/or faster acceleration in all circumstances due to assistance make an e-bike unlike an unassisted bike in a relevant way.

.

Let's be sensible

 

Which does make life tricky for ebike manufacturers, on the one hand they need to market their product on the basis of how different from unassisted bikes they are, on they other hand they need the legislators to keep thinking that their their product are so alike to unassisted bikes that they can be treated in the same way.

 

I don't think it makes life that tricky at all Patrick, all we are doing is offering the same sort of power a very fit road cyclists already have, to all. It could of course be argued that Bradly Wiggins for example on an electric bike would have a massively fast bike, but only up to 15.5mph +- 10% and I can't imagine him buying one in the first place.

 

The problems arise when electric bikes become more powerful than even these super athletes and can be ridden without pedaling, then of course they are a motorised vehicle and like it or not will be legislated as such.

 

To continue to thrive, the electric bike industry has to keep it's special relationship with the law makers, to achieve this all manufacturers especially the big guys need to be seen to be within the EU regulations.

 

Wisper certainly do not want to jeapordise the current status quo and intend to tow the line. As from 1st January 2010 all Wisper bikes coming into Europe will conform with the letter of EN15194 and will be certificated by TUV. As one of the smaller players in the industry we believe it is the only way we will keep the anti electric bike lobby at bay. We, through BEBA will be encouraging all reputable electric bike suppliers to do the same.

 

All the best David