A lot of things are being done to keep bikes within the law by some manufacturers and sellers, i have heard of one seller no longer willing to sell derestrictable bikes, and one unwilling to change a sprocket, as this would increase the top speed of the bike by 2 or three mph,i think this is taking things too far,if you bought a 30mph legal 50cc petrol scooter you would be offered derestriction to allow 40mph+ at the first service,i have never heard of anybody being prosecuted for this obvious breach of law,people speeding in cars, are generally allowed around 10 percent over the limit before speed cameras snap you, and the police admit to allowing 80mph plus to go unnoticed on the motorways.Some people appear to be becoming paranoid over the regulations on electric bikes, does anybody really think the police are going to be looking out for people travelling at 20mph on an electric bike,most police officers would not even realise that you were riding an electric bike let alone know the laws on them,and even if you were caught exceeding 15mph , my bike is fully legal 14.9mph assist max but it can reach 25mph plus easily downhill, it would be almost impossible to prove that the motor, and not your own pedal power was responsible for exceeding the 15mph the speed limit.
15mph legal limit
- Thread starter fishingpaul
- Start date
I think most of this discussion has arisen from the availability in the UK of throttle controlled bikes with derestriction possible.
The impending change to full conformity with EU pedelec law may well result in this subject tending to disappear as it doesn't seem to crop up in the EU in the same way, There e-bikes are mostly used as supplied, and their domestic designs are generally pure pedelecs with no sporting pretensions and without throttles.
.
The impending change to full conformity with EU pedelec law may well result in this subject tending to disappear as it doesn't seem to crop up in the EU in the same way, There e-bikes are mostly used as supplied, and their domestic designs are generally pure pedelecs with no sporting pretensions and without throttles.
.
This tendency to get hung up on exact compliance with near-unenforceable bits of really poorly structured law seems to be very much a British thing. The light aviation community will similarly argue the toss over bits of regulation that would be similarly difficult to enforce.
The problem seems to be one of people not having faith in the lower tiers of the judicial system, in particular in the ability of magistrates to interpret laws wisely. I have no doubt that if a prosecution was ever brought with regard to a breach of the EAPC regulations then it would be viewed by the bench with a good dose of common sense.
The real issue here is that many laws have no black and white, right or wrong, element. There are often very wide grey areas, which are left to the judiciary to interpret.
The real problem we face is that some of the power of the judiciary has been handed to the police and local authorities, who have powers to issue fixed penalties. They act as both prosecutor and judiciary when doing this and the defendant's ability to mount an effective defence is often very limited.
The speed restriction is an extremely good example of very poor law, as the regulations give no definitive conditions for applying the specified limit and no means for informing the rider as to whether the machine is actually legal at any time.
For example, it might be perfectly legal for an EAPC to provide power up to the 15mph limit at only one temperature, say -20 deg C, as the regulations don't state how the test should be conducted, as far as I can see. The manufacturer could, no doubt, show that his product complied with the letter of the law by compliance testing it in the far north somewhere. If the electronic systems happen to allow assist at speeds up to 20+ mph in higher temperatures, who's to say that this is illegal?
Bicycles aren't required by law to have speedometers at all, let alone accurately calibrated ones, so how is the owner supposed to know that his/her bike exceeds the 15mph assist limit? The rider could only be found guilty if there was evidence that showed, beyond reasonable doubt, that he/she was fully aware that his/her machine was illegal. This is a pretty difficult thing to prove, in my opinion.
I think we'd be well advised to adhere to the principle behind the EAPC law, which is clearly intended to make EAPC riders behave in a safe way and present no greater hazard than an ordinary pedal cycle. Provided we keep within this expected performance profile I very much doubt that the exact letter of the law would ever get to be tested.
Jeremy
The problem seems to be one of people not having faith in the lower tiers of the judicial system, in particular in the ability of magistrates to interpret laws wisely. I have no doubt that if a prosecution was ever brought with regard to a breach of the EAPC regulations then it would be viewed by the bench with a good dose of common sense.
The real issue here is that many laws have no black and white, right or wrong, element. There are often very wide grey areas, which are left to the judiciary to interpret.
The real problem we face is that some of the power of the judiciary has been handed to the police and local authorities, who have powers to issue fixed penalties. They act as both prosecutor and judiciary when doing this and the defendant's ability to mount an effective defence is often very limited.
The speed restriction is an extremely good example of very poor law, as the regulations give no definitive conditions for applying the specified limit and no means for informing the rider as to whether the machine is actually legal at any time.
For example, it might be perfectly legal for an EAPC to provide power up to the 15mph limit at only one temperature, say -20 deg C, as the regulations don't state how the test should be conducted, as far as I can see. The manufacturer could, no doubt, show that his product complied with the letter of the law by compliance testing it in the far north somewhere. If the electronic systems happen to allow assist at speeds up to 20+ mph in higher temperatures, who's to say that this is illegal?
Bicycles aren't required by law to have speedometers at all, let alone accurately calibrated ones, so how is the owner supposed to know that his/her bike exceeds the 15mph assist limit? The rider could only be found guilty if there was evidence that showed, beyond reasonable doubt, that he/she was fully aware that his/her machine was illegal. This is a pretty difficult thing to prove, in my opinion.
I think we'd be well advised to adhere to the principle behind the EAPC law, which is clearly intended to make EAPC riders behave in a safe way and present no greater hazard than an ordinary pedal cycle. Provided we keep within this expected performance profile I very much doubt that the exact letter of the law would ever get to be tested.
Jeremy
I've been a copper for close to twenty two years and I can offer you an almost cast iron assurance that there will never have been a single prosecution since the inception of the legislation which governs electric bikes.
The only coppers aware of the requirements are those who own or are interested in electric bikes or a few in the training depts.
Jeremy makes a number of good points and in the real world the greatest risk associated with 'hacking' an e bike to gain performance outside of the regulations is some fool who ends up with a 'wanton and furious cycling' charge.
Google it and you'll see what I mean.
Retailers have to be careful due to possible spot checks by Trading Standards whose prosecutions carry huge fines so I can understand that they are cautious.
Believe me in a world where people blow themselves up on tubes, abduct kids and binge drink (not all at once thankfully) a deresticted ebike travelling at 20mph does not even appear on the radar.
The only coppers aware of the requirements are those who own or are interested in electric bikes or a few in the training depts.
Jeremy makes a number of good points and in the real world the greatest risk associated with 'hacking' an e bike to gain performance outside of the regulations is some fool who ends up with a 'wanton and furious cycling' charge.
Google it and you'll see what I mean.
Retailers have to be careful due to possible spot checks by Trading Standards whose prosecutions carry huge fines so I can understand that they are cautious.
Believe me in a world where people blow themselves up on tubes, abduct kids and binge drink (not all at once thankfully) a deresticted ebike travelling at 20mph does not even appear on the radar.
I've always thought that "legality" of an electric bike is only likely to come into play following an accident where fault/ damage costs are to be determined, and an opposing solicitor has a vested interest in proving the cyclist at fault.
I very much doubt if the police follow the regulations as closely as we do.
Mary
I very much doubt if the police follow the regulations as closely as we do.
Mary
The point Mary makes has often been posted in the forum, it's only in the event of an accident that it could matter, but then it really could if the accident outcome was serious enough.
Remember the huge national newspaper and TV coverage and outrage about the accident in Cornwall where someone cycling fast down a narrow pavement killed someone. Our member Footie does, he lives near there, and I think that cyclist became a guest of Her Majesty.
Now imagine that was an illegal e-bike. The police could certainly start to take notice after an event like that and our lives might not be the same from then on, underlining the point Jeremy makes about keeping sensibly close to the guidelines.
.
Remember the huge national newspaper and TV coverage and outrage about the accident in Cornwall where someone cycling fast down a narrow pavement killed someone. Our member Footie does, he lives near there, and I think that cyclist became a guest of Her Majesty.
Now imagine that was an illegal e-bike. The police could certainly start to take notice after an event like that and our lives might not be the same from then on, underlining the point Jeremy makes about keeping sensibly close to the guidelines.
.
I used the Torq de-restricted and found it just too fast and I felt uncomfortable about riding it like that - the main problem was that it was much faster than the normal cyclist. When restricted it really seemed too slow but with a tongxin (190rpm) motor raised the speed by a mile an hour so strictly speaking illegal. However the extra speed made all the difference, not much difference in overall time to get to work compared to the de-restricted Torq and feeling that much safer as well. Worth the risk? We have heard from SEATALTEA who sounds like the sensible sort of the policeman we want more of, however I worry about some forces being quite target driven. Just imagine how many points they could get from a cyclists with what, in effect is a moped (no insurance, helmet, mot etc)!
There are quite a few things I do that are done for my safety (but not putting anybody else at risk) but are technically illegal - crossing the white line at a red light (not going through the junction). Life is full of worry if you want to stay 100% legal.
There are quite a few things I do that are done for my safety (but not putting anybody else at risk) but are technically illegal - crossing the white line at a red light (not going through the junction). Life is full of worry if you want to stay 100% legal.
Hi,
Can't quite understand the fuss about the legality issue. If the motor is legal, i.e. 250w or less continuous, then everything else is self limiting. If you gear it to do 20 mph, the motor and battery will not be up to hill climbing adequately - which is after all what most people buy an e-bike for. A 5mph speed increase, is not, in real world terms very significant.
I have ridden down steep hills on a normal road bike at well in excess of 40mph - NO motor involoved. Whats the big deal. E-bikes I have known are, without exception, incapable of achieving the same top speeds as an equivalently priced road or downhill bike on either the flat (without an excessive headwind) or downhill. Even uphill a fit cyclist on a good bike can often out do an e-bike, it's just that they will be expending a great deal more energy in doing so. The technology with the battery and motor involved sets the limits. The gearing is a minor issue.
So long as you don't fit 500w + motors then you're fine. If you do you won't get more than 500yds berfore the battery is flat...... Ergo problem solved!
Can't quite understand the fuss about the legality issue. If the motor is legal, i.e. 250w or less continuous, then everything else is self limiting. If you gear it to do 20 mph, the motor and battery will not be up to hill climbing adequately - which is after all what most people buy an e-bike for. A 5mph speed increase, is not, in real world terms very significant.
I have ridden down steep hills on a normal road bike at well in excess of 40mph - NO motor involoved. Whats the big deal. E-bikes I have known are, without exception, incapable of achieving the same top speeds as an equivalently priced road or downhill bike on either the flat (without an excessive headwind) or downhill. Even uphill a fit cyclist on a good bike can often out do an e-bike, it's just that they will be expending a great deal more energy in doing so. The technology with the battery and motor involved sets the limits. The gearing is a minor issue.
So long as you don't fit 500w + motors then you're fine. If you do you won't get more than 500yds berfore the battery is flat...... Ergo problem solved!
Harry, don't worry. They (the police, beaks etc.) really aren't interested.
A really flagrant breach of the law, massively illegal speeds on the pavement etc., that's another matter - but you don't need an e-bike for that (see flecc's post regarding this)!
A bit of over gearing on aTorq is really neither here nor there, they really don't go THAT fast! As most people agree they don't climb hills either, so as you can see the technology is self limiting. Ultimately the motor's power sees to that. A sensible approach to the law would just be to say, motors rated at above 250w continuous are illegal, and just leave it at that. It would be much simpler to enforce, and all issues around gearing and speed etc. would fall into place if this were so.
Last edited:
I've often said the same Phil, all that's needed is the power limit, nothing else.
Unfortunately our legislators are more renowned as control freaks rather than for their common sense.
Re: speeds on e-bikes versus standard bikes. On the flat and uphill it's as you say, but high downhill speeds can be reached on some e-bikes. I've had 41 mph on the Torq and 44.3 mph after it's conversion to the T bike, both on a fairly short downhill. I could easily get more on a suitable long downhill stretch, but really I'd need to drop the bars to cut wind resistance for that to greatly increase. With full drops it would definitely run to well over 50 mph.
.
Unfortunately our legislators are more renowned as control freaks rather than for their common sense.
Re: speeds on e-bikes versus standard bikes. On the flat and uphill it's as you say, but high downhill speeds can be reached on some e-bikes. I've had 41 mph on the Torq and 44.3 mph after it's conversion to the T bike, both on a fairly short downhill. I could easily get more on a suitable long downhill stretch, but really I'd need to drop the bars to cut wind resistance for that to greatly increase. With full drops it would definitely run to well over 50 mph.
.
Ithink that most people understand that the chance of a prosecution of an illegal e-bike is very slim. What bothers me, and perhaps many, is that I would like to stay completely within the law, not leaving anything to chance. That is almost impossible with current e-bike legislation and current e-bikes. Other than the Panasonic system, virtually all e-bikes do not adhere to the letter of the law. Many of us are left with the question "how far should I push it?" ( the law that is, not the bike 
)
For me, a bike that I can pedal and can provide assistance at around 20 mph is pretty much ideal (legal in many US states). A moped is not really an alternative to that. Is it time to lobby for a new category of e-bike?
)For me, a bike that I can pedal and can provide assistance at around 20 mph is pretty much ideal (legal in many US states). A moped is not really an alternative to that. Is it time to lobby for a new category of e-bike?
I think so John, the 20 mph class with insurance that Switzerland has and which Germany has broadly adopted would be ideal, and we are legally entitled to it by the EU equality laws. Therefore to get it in force would not be breaking entirely new ground, merely enforcing an established legal right.
.
There are many, many laws that are just as poorly defined as the EAPC regulations and which many of us flout much of the time, often in complete ignorance.
A read through still extant statute will soon reveal some of them, usually in a way that will bring about a chuckle or two. Although many are pretty ancient, and haven't seen the light of day in court for a century or two, some are more recent and just as frequently ignored.
It's worth remembering that our legal system, specifically the judiciary, has a great deal of leeway built in to allow common sense to prevail. For example, a jury can find a defendant not guilty, even though there has been a clear and obvious breach of the law, if they feel that the law is wrong. Similarly, a judge (or magistrates bench) may choose not to award a sentence even if a defendant is guilty. Both of these tactics have been used to try and correct misguided legislation in the past, but in the case of something as trivial as a technical breach of the EAPC regulations I really don't think there is even the remotest chance that it would get to court.
If you want an example of an even poorer bit of law, then the recently enacted law making it an offence to possess images of violent pornography is a good one. Most right-thinking individuals would agree that such distasteful material should be discouraged, but this bit of knee-jerk legislation, following a single case of a deranged individual, has inadvertently made thousands of people criminals. The law is extremely badly worded and effectively outlaws images of such perfectly legal (if not to my taste) activities such as intimate body piercing. Tattoo and piercing parlours are now potentially liable to prosecution, as are the owners of web sites that depict such material. It may well be that even some adverts technically fall within the far-flung net of this bit of poor law. What's worse, this offence falls within those that require anyone convicted to be compulsorily placed on the sex offenders register. One has to wonder quite how this ended up on the statute book.
I'm sure the bereaved lady that fought to get this law enacted, following her daughter's murder, didn't intend this side effect, but unfortunately the law is a very blunt instrument with which to fight personal causes.
Jeremy
A read through still extant statute will soon reveal some of them, usually in a way that will bring about a chuckle or two. Although many are pretty ancient, and haven't seen the light of day in court for a century or two, some are more recent and just as frequently ignored.
It's worth remembering that our legal system, specifically the judiciary, has a great deal of leeway built in to allow common sense to prevail. For example, a jury can find a defendant not guilty, even though there has been a clear and obvious breach of the law, if they feel that the law is wrong. Similarly, a judge (or magistrates bench) may choose not to award a sentence even if a defendant is guilty. Both of these tactics have been used to try and correct misguided legislation in the past, but in the case of something as trivial as a technical breach of the EAPC regulations I really don't think there is even the remotest chance that it would get to court.
If you want an example of an even poorer bit of law, then the recently enacted law making it an offence to possess images of violent pornography is a good one. Most right-thinking individuals would agree that such distasteful material should be discouraged, but this bit of knee-jerk legislation, following a single case of a deranged individual, has inadvertently made thousands of people criminals. The law is extremely badly worded and effectively outlaws images of such perfectly legal (if not to my taste) activities such as intimate body piercing. Tattoo and piercing parlours are now potentially liable to prosecution, as are the owners of web sites that depict such material. It may well be that even some adverts technically fall within the far-flung net of this bit of poor law. What's worse, this offence falls within those that require anyone convicted to be compulsorily placed on the sex offenders register. One has to wonder quite how this ended up on the statute book.
I'm sure the bereaved lady that fought to get this law enacted, following her daughter's murder, didn't intend this side effect, but unfortunately the law is a very blunt instrument with which to fight personal causes.
Jeremy
Yes, I agree 100%, totally off topic I suppose, but the idea that its a criminal offence to possess images or videos of adults play acting in completely consensual acts is BARMY. There are far too many freedoms being taken away because of (at worst) one or two tragic events that whips up a handful of hysterical people, or (actually probably even worse thinking about it), statistics that are taken across the entire population (often then badly mangled, misunderstood or used to form invalid conclusions) that say 'someone is more likely to harm someone if they do this' - but as we know, for individuals or smaller groups the global statstics may not apply. Instead of treating us as individuals we are constantly bashed over the head with stats.
You can bet your bottom dollar that the first person knocked down and killed by an ebike will get whipped up into hysteria about ebikes and put paid to any easing of restrictions even though its bound to happen before long. I don't know why people can't see sense on these things. People getting killed on the roads is down to one thing and one thing alone - bad driving/riding. I don't know why don't get more police on the roads stopping and prosecuting bad driving rather than inventing hundreds of new offences that just keeps them tied up in beaurocracy and makes perfectly safe drivers/riders angry at the police for getting caught up in an offence in an arbitrary fashion where there is no evidence that they as an individual are doing any harm what-so-ever.
Whats fundamentally going wrong with this country is that the state and police should fundamentally trust the population and the law should step if an individual is going to cause harm to someone else. Unfortunately its the other way around with the state and the police fundamentally not trusting the population and having to keep tabs on people all the time.
Last edited:
Actually the fast pedelec class in Germany has a motor assistance up to 28mph, I just checked again. (at least the bike from Flyer).
I think if this class would be allowed everywhere and prices would go down a littlebit, more people would consider a pedelec a real alternative to cars.
Patrick
Last edited:
I am the most surprised that we can have it in Germany. Usually we have very strict rules and laws, with one exception: no speed limit on the Autobahn...
As I wrote in my first impression, I was looking for an alternative means of transportation. The slow 15mph class was nice but not really what I was expecting. But 2 miles with that fast bike was enough to convince me that this would be a good replacement for my car. The good thing is that even at 20mph you still get the full motor assist. Of course, battery range suffers, but thats ok with me, I will buy a second battery in February and can then go easily for a 40 miles trip (20 each way) on the high 150% setting.
As I wrote in my first impression, I was looking for an alternative means of transportation. The slow 15mph class was nice but not really what I was expecting. But 2 miles with that fast bike was enough to convince me that this would be a good replacement for my car. The good thing is that even at 20mph you still get the full motor assist. Of course, battery range suffers, but thats ok with me, I will buy a second battery in February and can then go easily for a 40 miles trip (20 each way) on the high 150% setting.
I'm equally surprised at that German limit, but then again I would guess that it is really fairly sensible. Speeds below about 30mph are fairly safe, so perhaps the German government have acted quite sensibly.
Ordinary pedal bicycles have a fairly wide speed range, even if we tend to think of speeds in the 12 to 15 mph range as being normal. My recumbent, without electric assistance, is normally happiest at around 22mph and even in my unfit state I can fairly easily get to around 25 to 28 mph on the level.
I was out for a gentle ride a week or so ago when the local bike club came whizzing past, I was doing about 20mph yet they came past me as if I was standing still.
There can't be much difference, in terms of risk and the potential to cause death or injury, between an electric bike doing 20 mph and an ordinary pedal cycle doing the same speed, so the speed restriction does seem daft.
As Flecc rightly pointed out, an average power restriction would be quite enough to limit performance, with no need for the unenforceable assisted speed limit.
Jeremy
Ordinary pedal bicycles have a fairly wide speed range, even if we tend to think of speeds in the 12 to 15 mph range as being normal. My recumbent, without electric assistance, is normally happiest at around 22mph and even in my unfit state I can fairly easily get to around 25 to 28 mph on the level.
I was out for a gentle ride a week or so ago when the local bike club came whizzing past, I was doing about 20mph yet they came past me as if I was standing still.
There can't be much difference, in terms of risk and the potential to cause death or injury, between an electric bike doing 20 mph and an ordinary pedal cycle doing the same speed, so the speed restriction does seem daft.
As Flecc rightly pointed out, an average power restriction would be quite enough to limit performance, with no need for the unenforceable assisted speed limit.
Jeremy
I was just thinking, what would happen if I took a fast S-Flyer, which is perfectly legal in Germany (and therefore should be in all other EU countries), and would do a trip to the UK. Would I get trouble with local police? Would they confiscate the bike or even my driving licence?
I agree with Jeremy, most good street bikes can easily go faster than 20mph. Heck, with my mountainbike I once reached 45mph on a steep downhill street.
I think all these laws and restrictions, even the liberal ones in Germany, make absolutely no sense. A bicycle is a bicycle, as long as you have to pedal to get forward.
By the way, in the US president Bush just recently has signed a pedelec law:
The US Senate has passed SR 1156 clearing the way for legal definition of an electric bicycle in the USA. President Bush has signed this law. The new law will assign the governance of electric bicycles to the Consumer Product Safety Commission and will define a bicycle that has two pedals (and is capable of being propelled by those pedals) and an electric motor of no more than 750 watts, a top speed (on motor only) of 20 mph as a "bicycle"
Sounds pretty liberal to me.
Patrick
I agree with Jeremy, most good street bikes can easily go faster than 20mph. Heck, with my mountainbike I once reached 45mph on a steep downhill street.
I think all these laws and restrictions, even the liberal ones in Germany, make absolutely no sense. A bicycle is a bicycle, as long as you have to pedal to get forward.
By the way, in the US president Bush just recently has signed a pedelec law:
The US Senate has passed SR 1156 clearing the way for legal definition of an electric bicycle in the USA. President Bush has signed this law. The new law will assign the governance of electric bicycles to the Consumer Product Safety Commission and will define a bicycle that has two pedals (and is capable of being propelled by those pedals) and an electric motor of no more than 750 watts, a top speed (on motor only) of 20 mph as a "bicycle"
Sounds pretty liberal to me.
Patrick
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
