I'm sure that if you see the fine print, this means that pedal-assist ebikes that have 250W motor and are limited to 25kph (15mph) are considered bicycles. Something like a Surron is still considered a motorbike and needs to be registerated, insured, needs a licence and is only allowed to be driven on the roads among cars - as they should.
this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2023
267 points (98.9% liked)
micromobility - Ebikes, scooters, longboards: Whatever floats your goat, this is micromobility
2333 readers
21 users here now
Ebikes, bicycles, scooters, skateboards, longboards, eboards, motorcycles, skates, unicycles: Whatever floats your goat, this is all things micromobility!
"Transportation using lightweight vehicles such as bicycles or scooters, especially electric ones that may be borrowed as part of a self-service rental program in which people rent vehicles for short-term use within a town or city.
micromobility is seen as a potential solution to moving people more efficiently around cities"
Feel free to also check out
It's a little sad that we need to actually say this, but:
Don't be an asshole or you will be permanently banned.
Respectful debate is totally OK, criticizing a product is fine, but being verbally abusive will not be tolerated.
Focus on discussing the idea, not attacking the person.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That's not a fine print, that's a definition for ebikes. Surron is 100% a motorbike. They don't even look like bicycles and never targeted the bicycle market.
It's a spectrum and the limits are quite arbitrary. Plenty of people would agree that Surron is a motorbike, but some of those same people want to be able to drive without pedaling, have more powerful motor than 250W, go faster than 25kph or all of the above.
There's no spectrum, that's the thing.
No spectrum? Okay. So there's no difference between 250W pedal assist limited to 25kph, 250W pedal assist limited to 40kph, 400W pedal assist limted to 25kph, 400W pedal assist limited to 60kph, 250W with a throttle limited to 25kph, 500W with a throttle limited to 50kph etc. These are all the same and it's only when we get to the Surron when it goes from bicycle to electric motorbike?
Sounds exactly how it was regulated in Germany, except for the license I think. It's pretty much handled the same as a moped, which I think is totally fair.
Don't you need a licence for moped in Germany? In Finland you need one unless you're born before 1980 I think. Same with motorcycles.
Not if they're capped at 25 kilometers per hour.
Huh. We don't have those. Here moped is defined as having maximum of 50cc engine and speed limited to 45kph. You need a license for those which you can get when you're 15.
They're popular with younger people, some of which also illegally unlocked them of course.
According to the article, those limits are regulated on EU level. Which also makes perfect sense, since that allows for a single market of e-bikes.
Yes, they're now. Those laws existed for much longer within Germany already though, hence why I compared them.
I sure would like to read the actual ruling, but from what I see in the article, this applies to pedal assist e-bikes, and wouldn't apply to e-bikes that have a throttle which is operated by a way other than pedaling (like a thumb or twist throttle). I have to think there's a maximum speed and/or weight as well, otherwise someone could very easily build a large, heavy, highway-ready "e-bike" that just uses pedaling for the throttle, but is in every other way an electric motorcycle.
Of course EU regulations, contrary to the US, limit pedal-assist bikes to a maximum continuous rated power of no more than 250 W and a speed to 25 km/h before cutting out power, leaving you to rely your legs for more speed.
its the same rules in Australia, but every bike seems to just have a 250W firmware limit that everyone just bypasses and then rides like a dick.
How is that contrary to the US? The US has limits that are higher, not contrary.
250's pretty low espically for hill climbing
It is plenty, as long as the torque is sufficient. When mountainbiking I have never felt I would need more power, even on climbs where keeping the front wheel down is tricky. Of course you cannot sustain 25 km/h on steeper hills, but do you even need to?
I can and need to with my American bike with a 45kmh limit and 250/750 peak. I used that bike for a daily 50km commute big hills all the way to the foothill. If it weren't for that setup I would have had to drive everyday.
Perhaps if Europe stopped getting in their own way over ebike limits more people there could abandon their cars, at least for some of the time?
Lol an American criticising Europe for car use...
It's not low. It's more than the average human can deliver. And humans can hill climb easily. Double your power and no hill is too hard for you.
Just don't buy useless shit with a motor wheel. The motor should deliver power through your drivetrain.
Nice. Get with it, US
Ebikes are already legally considered bicycles and not motor vehicles in the US: It's a federal regulation so it applies to every state.
Oh what? Well, I'll say that cops in multiple states here are unaware.
That's good to know though, I'm a bit gunshy about taking the trails with no motor vehicle signs.
Start by printing this and keeping it with you. Then dig around until you can find the specific federal regulation and regulations pertinent to your state, print those out, too.
I used to do motorized bicycles, got pulled over with a friend once. Cop was all "You have to have registration and insurance and and and." I said, "Wait, I have the Illinois law on my phone here, this went into effect Jan 1 this year [I forget now what year that was]." Cop took the info back to his car for a few minutes (in the meantime, I was putting my chain back on, it had fallen off). He comes back and says, "I learned something new today. Be safe."
Told him we had our route planned out to avoid the high traffic roads already, that we always followed the rules of the road for cars and bicycles. I'm sure it didn't hurt that we were both wearing full face helmets and armored jackets.
Rad. Thanks.
One cop literally drove onto the sidewalk so his car was half on the sidewalk and half on the road to cut me off and started screaming at me about CCs and horsepower.
When I explained it was an electric bike, he seemed very confused and then repeated the 50cc maximum and drove away.
Make sure you actually print these to paper. I'd done that, but didn't have them with me on my encounter. I would not do this today, but on that day so many years ago, I let the cop take my phone back to his car with him.
Print them to paper.
Okay that's a good point.
I was just going to use my phone because I didn't even think of that.
Cops are very frequently ignorant of the actual law:
Class 1 ebikes:
These ebikes are limited to a maximum speed of 20 mph and are designed to operate solely on pedal assist. They do not have a throttle for motor power.
Class 2 ebikes:
Similar to Class 1, these ebikes also have a maximum speed of 20 mph. However, they are equipped with a throttle in addition to pedal assist, allowing the motor to operate without pedaling.
Class 3 ebikes:
These ebikes are restricted to pedal-assist like Class 1 but can reach a higher maximum assisted speed of 28 mph.
The above are not motor vehicles in any state. If a cop challenges you on it, you can try to explain and encourage them to look it up but if you get ticketed it won't stand up in court. Feel free to talk to a lawyer in your area to confirm of course, don't take legal advice from strangers on the Internet: Verify information for yourself.
Thats because the added weight and power tears up trails, and the stewards hate that shit.
But that's not actually enforceable?
According to federal law, I mean?
I'm guessing each state and county can make their own laws
A "no motor vehicles" sign would not prohibit e-bikes. However, I see no reason why a trail couldn't enforce prohibition of a list of categories that includes both motor vehicles and e-bikes as separate items.
Why not? An electric motor is, by definition, a motor.
Legal definitions aren't the same as dictionary definitions.
The federal law applies to the public roads. Trails are NOT public roads. They can have any restrictions their management wants. Just like private roads at supermarkets - they're not public roads and supermarket can say no Ford cars here and you have no recourse there.
By not public, trails are private because they belong to the state, you mean?
They aren't private usually, they're public, but maintained by volunteers.
I helped maintain a trail for a couple years back when ebikes were just starting to be a thing, and they absolutely tore up trails. We had to put up additional signs (from the very limited budget) just for ebikes.
Ah, got it. I don't go on tiny trails or dirtbiking trails.
Pretty much all hardpack or paved.
They're not public roads. That's the difference.
What aren't, specifically, and what is the difference of what?
What are you talking about? The EU were playing catch-up to us on this one.
Past run-ins with cops who apparently knew about the same as I did about this federal law.
It's in all the other comments.