20mph speed government petition is live!

[Mario Antony]

This is 1000% correct, be very careful what you wish for. Watch what steve has said, yes minister or yes prime minister, you really dont want humphry applying more cost!

If the GOV goes that root, it will be a straight shoot to both feet

Nevertheless, when ebikes in avg over here costs over 6k£$€, I can't see any problem paying tax

It's almost the same qs earing Mercedes owners complaining about the cost of some extras...

 

[Stoffel]

If the GOV goes that root, it will be a straight shoot to both feet

Nevertheless, when ebikes in avg over here costs over 6k£$€, I can't see any problem paying tax

It's almost the same qs earing Mercedes owners complaining about the cost of some extras...

The problem isn’t really about paying a bit of tax. The main problem is if they are moved into a different class of vehicle they could be banned from everywhere except the road which would be a disaster.

 

[Mario Antony]

The problem isn’t really about paying a bit of tax. The main problem is if they are moved into a different class of vehicle they could be banned from everywhere except the road which would be a disaster.

Yes that may happen...

IF that happens, eMTBs sale will take a big downfall - and that's more worrying for manufacturers and shops.

 

[Paulquattro]

Yes that may happen...

IF that happens, eMTBs sale will take a big downfall - and that's more worrying for manufacturers and shops.

Its not much good for the poor fuckers who own them either

 

[Kyokushin]

Yeah, 20 mph its reasonable change, even 45km/h would be OK, like in the USA.

 

[Mario Antony]

Its not much good for the poor fuckers who own them either

It already happen to Dirt Bikes, and even MtB/emtb

Who has a lot more to lose is the industry/stores (financial speeking)

 

[stumpydumpy]

Amusing,

For this discussion it looks to me that you need to separate 2 categories:
1 : E-bike with no relation between riders input and speed = throttle
2 : E-bike with nescesseraly a relation between riders input and speed = partly bio with support

Why to make a difference?
category 1 never was a bicycle and never will be. Its just their lobby who pretends. Albeit that it can be great fun though. Its more like a motorbike. In the area of the mtb I should say its more like my enduro moto-bike.

Category 2, given the max of 250W motor, iot has its own limitation caused by the maximum possible cadans of the rider. For example, not many of us can do 120 r/m and if lucky at this r/m you can reach 40 -45 km/h. Reality is that most of us do 90 r/m and will end at ~30 km/h.
Compare this with a real bio-bike and take for this example a perfect trained athlete. He/She will have the same results.
Oh , if so, why an e-mtb then? Just for fun and for the uphills.

So why limit it? Would you propose a limit for the bio-bike aswell?

I'm in favor of no limit.
In the same way that I'm in favor of common sence and friendlyness on- and off road.
Have fun

 

[Streddaz]

Amusing,

For this discussion it looks to me that you need to separate 2 categories:
1 : E-bike with no relation between riders input and speed = throttle
2 : E-bike with nescesseraly a relation between riders input and speed = partly bio with support

Why to make a difference?
category 1 never was a bicycle and never will be. Its just their lobby who pretends. Albeit that it can be great fun though. Its more like a motorbike. In the area of the mtb I should say its more like my enduro moto-bike.

Category 2, given the max of 250W motor, iot has its own limitation caused by the maximum possible cadans of the rider. For example, not many of us can do 120 r/m and if lucky at this r/m you can reach 40 -45 km/h. Reality is that most of us do 90 r/m and will end at ~30 km/h.
Compare this with a real bio-bike and take for this example a perfect trained athlete. He/She will have the same results.
Oh , if so, why an e-mtb then? Just for fun and for the uphills.

So why limit it? Would you propose a limit for the bio-bike aswell?

I'm in favor of no limit.
In the same way that I'm in favor of common sence and friendlyness on- and off road.
Have fun

There are already separate categories for throttle and pedal assist bikes in most countries.

Australia has two.
1. Power Assisted Pedal Cycles (200 watts maximum)

2. EN15194 Certified Power Assisted Pedal Cycle (Pedelac, 250 watts maximum)

Anything else is a motorbike.

USA has 4 categories
Class 1 eBike – Pedal-assist eBike (aka. Pedelec, Spedelec, Speed Pedelec)
Max. assisted speed limited to 20mph, motor power limited to 750W
Class 2 eBike – Throttle-assist eBike.
Max. assisted speed of 20mph. Motor power limited to 750W
Class 3 eBike – Pedal-assist (+optional throttle)
Speed limited to 28mph on pedal-assist, 20mph on throttle.
750W = 0.75kW = 1 horsepower
Class 4 eBike – *An unofficial term of an electric bike with pedals that’s more powerful than Class 3 eBikes.
Motor power over 750W
Maximum assisted speed over 28mph

The UK also has 4.
EAPC (Class 1 in the US)
This class stands for “electrically assisted pedal cycles”. No registration is needed, you don’t need insurance, you must be over 14yrs old to ride one and it must not have more power than a 250w motor. These you can ride anywhere you are allowed, including cycle paths, roads and other bicycle-friendly environments. Do be warned that if the e-bike has a throttle (a ‘twist and go’ EAPC) even if you don’t use it the e-bike by law is classed as an S-Pedelec. And yes, it is technically still an S-Pedelec even if it only has 250w of power or less.

S-Pedelec (Class 2 & 3 in the US)
They must be registered with DVLA, you need insurance, you must be over 16 and you must pass the CBT motorcycle and moped training. In short, these are e-bikes that are over 250w, and can come with a throttle

E-Moped (Same in the US)
They must be registered with DVLA, you need insurance, you must be over 16 and you must pass the CBT motorcycle and moped training and it must not go faster than 45 KPH

E-Motorbike (Same in the US)
They must be registered with DVLA, you need insurance, you must be over 17 and you must pass the CBT motorcycle and moped training and it must have the ability to go faster than 45 KPH

There is no speed limit for Ebikes, just like there is no speed limit for non-Ebikes there's just a motor assisted speed cut. You can pedal past the limit to whatever speed your legs can carry you. Sure, your big tyred Emtb isn't going to be easy to pedal past the speed cut, but so is the equivalent non-motored Enduro bike.
The speed restriction is required as although EMTB bikes are designed to be ridded off road, they can also be ridded on the foot paths and shared pathways where it can be dangerous to ride unrestricted.

 

[stumpydumpy]

@ Streddaz
You are probably right in your enumeration of legal classes, but it doesn't bring an argument pro nor against.
In my opinion for this discussion you should stick to the comparisson between bio- and e bike.
And with that for the matter of speed I don't see any difference between them.

 

[Streddaz]

@ Streddaz
You are probably right in your enumeration of legal classes, but it doesn't bring an argument pro nor against.
In my opinion for this discussion you should stick to the comparisson between bio- and e bike.
And with that for the matter of speed I don't see any difference between them.

There are two main issues with Ebikes being unrestricted.
1: Riding the bike in a share path environment and excessive speed causing risk to pedestrians.
I know that a fit athlete on a road bike can go a lot faster, but you aren't going to go that much faster on an equivalent non motored MTB. Would you be happy with some unskilled numpty on a bike doing 60kph on the footpaths? You only had to see the videos that one idiot on this forum used to post of his unrestricted bike, flying along through the town, buzzing pedestrians, to see how this will end up with harsher restrictions or even bans on Ebikes.

2: Issues with land access for Ebikes.
There are a lot of places around the world where Ebikes are not allowed on trails that normal MTB are. This comes from the perception of simply having a motor or being faster and causing more conflict with other trail users. Having Ebikes unrestricted will give groups that oppose Ebikes more ammunition to not allow them into these areas.

Yes, you can go faster on the flat on a normal bike in some conditions but there's not non-powered bike out there that can keep up with and Ebike on a climb, and that's with a speed cut.

I think the 32kph/20mph limit that some countries have is plenty fast enough. If you want to go faster, just pedal harder or buy a motorbike.

 

[#lazy]

Very long winded way of saying “you agree with the 20mph petition”

 

[Streddaz]

Very long winded way of saying “you agree with the 20mph petition”

Yes, but I disagree that there should be no limit, as I was replying to Stumpy's comment.

 

[stumpydumpy]

Hi Straddaz,

Perhaps we can agree that Average Joe on a non-restricted bike you cannot go faster than on a bio-bike, as a result of the restricted pedaling frequency?

By the way, this is my last contribution to this topic.
Be smart and have fun.

 

[Streddaz]

Hi Straddaz,

Perhaps we can agree that Average Joe on a non-restricted bike you cannot go faster than on a bio-bike, as a result of the restricted pedaling frequency?

By the way, this is my last contribution to this topic.
Be smart and have fun.

So, you mean cadence as in pedalling frequency? You only need to fit a bigger chain ring and you will be able to have a higher top speed. When you have a motor that puts out 4x the pedal assistance, it's only gearing that restricts you to a top speed if there's no speed cut and gearing is easily changed.

 

[GlenMcD]

It appears that there are basically two camps here. Those that agree that assistance cut-off should be at least 32KPH, and those that don't care, but for some reason post here anyways. Personally, I like to to go back to first principles and in this argument, that brings about the question what is the justification for the current limit of 25KPH? One may be able to find reasons for its initial acceptance, but given the somewhat different world we now live in, I fail to see the justification.

I personally am 100% driven to pay out to derestrict my ebike, no question. Had the limit been 32KPH, I would not bother. It may be a very small adjustment, but it actually means a lot. I'm used to riding an unrestricted ebike with 200W motor. Not very much assistance, but it never hit a wall, and it encouraged me to keep pushing hard on the pedals for that little bit more exhilaration/speed. I find that on my new ebike, although I am still free to pedal as hard and as fast as I like, there seems far less reason to bother above 25KPH. On old ebike, 32KPH was my average for flat sections, while round trip averages were about 27KPH and up to 30KPH if I pushed to the extreme over 10KM.

Another point here is that any bike can easily do 60KPH downhill, regardless of gearing or assistance levels, with or without brakes. When going downhill, if something goes wrong, that's when it takes the longest to slow down. So let's not pretend that limiting assistance to 25KPH offers far greater safety. Safety exists when the rider makes good choices while riding. I'm not saying that ebikes should be capable of 80KPH on the flat as many escooters are now. But 32KPH minimum cut-off is a complete no-brainer. Sorry, I can't sign the petition as I'm not in U.K. Otherwise I would.

I heard that some are discussing raising power cap for ebikes from 250W to 500W. This should not be considered without first introducing above. 250W is enough except for ecargo, 25KPH is not enough. Period.

 

[Weeksy]

, 25KPH is not enough. Period.

Yeah it is. Period. Fact. Fact



Once it cuts out, pedal harder.

 

[Stoffel]

It appears that there are basically two camps here. Those that agree that assistance cut-off should be at least 32KPH, and those that don't care, but for some reason post here anyways. Personally, I like to to go back to first principles and in this argument, that brings about the question what is the justification for the current limit of 25KPH? One may be able to find reasons for its initial acceptance, but given the somewhat different world we now live in, I fail to see the justification.

I personally am 100% driven to pay out to derestrict my ebike, no question. Had the limit been 32KPH, I would not bother. It may be a very small adjustment, but it actually means a lot. I'm used to riding an unrestricted ebike with 200W motor. Not very much assistance, but it never hit a wall, and it encouraged me to keep pushing hard on the pedals for that little bit more exhilaration/speed. I find that on my new ebike, although I am still free to pedal as hard and as fast as I like, there seems far less reason to bother above 25KPH. On old ebike, 32KPH was my average for flat sections, while round trip averages were about 27KPH and up to 30KPH if I pushed to the extreme over 10KM.

Another point here is that any bike can easily do 60KPH downhill, regardless of gearing or assistance levels, with or without brakes. When going downhill, if something goes wrong, that's when it takes the longest to slow down. So let's not pretend that limiting assistance to 25KPH offers far greater safety. Safety exists when the rider makes good choices while riding. I'm not saying that ebikes should be capable of 80KPH on the flat as many escooters are now. But 32KPH minimum cut-off is a complete no-brainer. Sorry, I can't sign the petition as I'm not in U.K. Otherwise I would.

I heard that some are discussing raising power cap for ebikes from 250W to 500W. This should not be considered without first introducing above. 250W is enough except for ecargo, 25KPH is not enough. Period.

So you believe only people who agree with your viewpoint should post here and that you’re right without question?

That seems to be a typical stance on most subjects these days.

 

[GlenMcD]

So you believe only people who agree with your viewpoint should post here and that you’re right without question?

That seems to be a typical stance on most subjects these days.

If one doesn't feel the need for assistance above 25KPH, why impose this limitation on others? I fail to see the motivation behind retaining this 25KPH cut-off, except of course that it may limit the sales of cheap and dangerous chinese ebikes that have no limiter But those outside of China mostly see this as a very good thing. Another might be those that are selling derestriction devices. Unless you make your motivations clear, it's likely that your point will fall on deaf ears. Telling people what they don't need won't win you any points here and probably anywhere else. If there is a real case for retaining the limit, such as safety, sure let's hear it. But I fail to see how avoiding an accident at 32KPH uphill is more difficult than avoiding an accident rolling at 50KPH (or even 30KPH) downhill.

 

[Bob88]

I don't comply with nonsensical laws. My bike is set to 21.8mph and its just perfect for city traffic. I signed the petition though.

 

[DieBoy]

Be careful what you wish for.

The UK government could agree to raise the power-assist max speed but also bring in compulsory insurance and helmet use.

It would also mean UK ebikes not being legal in the EU. Even if it's only a software configuration, manufacturers are likely to pass the cost on.

For the record, I easily get over 30kmh on the flat despite the 25kmh assist cut-off. Either some (older?) motors have a lot of resistance or some people have legs made of jelly.