Approved ebike list?

[jazper53]

Very true, which means it'll never happen, unfortunately.



I tend to agree, but there is a slim chance that the government wish to seek a genuine solution that will allow kit or DIY ebikes to be made legal. They've done this for kit cars and motorcycles, so there is at least a precedent that shines a tiny glimmer of hope.




Yes, but the long standing UK regs allow a throttle and there is (so we are led to believe) an informal agreement in principle to the use of a throttle by the DfT. Testing power assist speed without a throttle is tricky, but not too hard if the pedelec is just a simple pedal speed sensor, as most kits and DIY one-off ebikes use. All that requires is for the pedals to be going around, as there is no load sensor on the cranks, so it is fairly easy to detect when the pedals need some effort to turn as the power assist ceases.

It would seem in this country are answer to everthing is regulation, regulation, we have becoming so overburdened with laws we are likely to sink. The most successful Tiger economies have deregulated and their Goverments are miniscule compared to our obese, parasitical adminstration. If we ever wish to see growth in our economy in the future, we will have to trim the Goverment and its administration down to bear minum and allow people the FREEDOM to get on with it business, unfettered from state legalised robbery.

P.S. IMHO

 

[Scimitar]

Come now, Jeremy, bike shops testing bikes?......

What would that leave for the inevitable Quango to "organise"?

Indeed, the very idea of a non-back-pocket backhander is anathema.
Why, before you know it, there will be politicians wondering where they will get their retirement sinecure and we can't have that now, can we?
I'm reminded of the shambles that occurred in Ireland when compulsory MoT testing was introduced. It was awarded to one company, who set up a network of testing stations and made an utter mint out of it. Bungs? Backhanders? Perish the thought.

 

[neptune]

@Jazper53. I had to laugh when you added IMHO. Reminded me of a quote;
"The meek shall inherit the earth-if nobody minds..."

 

[Jeremy]

One thing occurred to me about this whole government incompetence/laziness thing. We seem to have at least one trade body that is seemingly working to further their interests with the DfT with regard to regulation, but do we have any ebike owners doing the same?

Whilst the vendors getting together is all well and good, I cannot help but feel that the interests of owners might be slightly different and have concerns with some aspects of regulation that the vendors may not have a particular problem with.

I know from personal experience that government departments pretty much ignore individuals who contact them, but there must, by now, be a significant number of ebike owners in the UK. Has anyone thought of getting as many of them together as possible and collectively approaching the DfT to see if that might carry more weight with them?

It's a pity this forum only seems to have a small number of active members, or else it might be a good place to start.

 

[Miles]

One thing occurred to me about this whole government incompetence/laziness thing. We seem to have at least one trade body that is seemingly working to further their interests with the DfT with regard to regulation, but do we have any ebike owners doing the same?...........................
Has anyone thought of getting as many of them together as possible and collectively approaching the DfT to see if that might carry more weight with them?

It occurred to me, too... My only contact with them was 5 years ago, with respect to the possibility of relaxing the helmet requirement for the Low Powered Moped category. I'd be keen to take part in a lobbying exercise, especially if it also addressed aspects of the Type Approval process relevant to higher powered bikes.

 

[amigafan2003]

It's a pity this forum only seems to have a small number of active members, or else it might be a good place to start.

And the wrong type of members at that - at least if we want to further our cause, rather than meekly accepting the status quo.

 

[Jeremy]

To be effective (i.e at least get an audience with someone at the DfT WGAF), then a lobbying group would need to be fairly large and represent a significant proportion of those who own, or wish to own, ebikes and use them legally. It would also have to have mutually agreed and clear objectives, like getting the present legal muddle resolved, pushing for the use of throttles to be allowed on all ebikes, creating a simple method for approving DIY or kit built ebikes than essentially meet the performance requirements of the EU regulations and perhaps exploring ways to approve higher powered ebikes as light weight mopeds with some relaxation of the present overly restrictive motorcycle regulations.

I see the major stumbling block as getting enough people seriously involved and convincing the DfT that a lobbying group is representative. Putting forward a proposal to the DfT for consideration is fairly straightforward. I've done it before to get regulation relaxed for very light aircraft, and found the process painfully slow (an average delay of 6 weeks to reply to any correspondence) but other than that not too challenging. The key I found before was to do their job for them.

Government policy is that regulation should be risk and impact based. In this instance the risk issue is fairly easy to address; make ebikes present no greater risk to the public than pedal cycles. The impact issue is harder, as this usually involves a fairly complex assessment of the effect on UK industry, imports, jobs etc, and can be a bit of a minefield. Nevertheless, I'd be happy to do the paperwork, circulate it for discussion and review and negotiate with the DfT.

What we now need is enough support to get such an idea off the ground. There are a few UK ebikers on ES, so we could draft some terms of reference for what we'd like to see and jointly see if we can drum up interest on both fora.

 

[Miles]

What we now need is enough support to get such an idea off the ground. There are a few UK ebikers on ES, so we could draft some terms of reference for what we'd like to see and jointly see if we can drum up interest on both fora.

Count me in, Jeremy.

 

[Old_Dave]

+1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[indalo]

To be effective (i.e at least get an audience with someone at the DfT WGAF), then a lobbying group would need to be fairly large and represent a significant proportion of those who own, or wish to own, ebikes and use them legally.

Let's hope they don't read this forum then!

I see the major stumbling block as getting enough people seriously involved and convincing the DfT that a lobbying group is representative.

Let's hope they don't read this forum then!

What we now need is enough support to get such an idea off the ground. There are a few UK ebikers on ES, so we could draft some terms of reference for what we'd like to see and jointly see if we can drum up interest on both fora.

Jeremy, wishing sincerely that I didn't appear to be attempting to dampen your enthusiasm for what, after all, is a really worthwhile cause, I think the premise stands about as much chance of success as more stringent gun law in the USA.

Many of this little ebike community have declared quite openly on lots of occasions that they have absolutely no respect for the rule of law and will do whatever they feel like doing, regardless. I find that part of being associated with Pedelecs both embarrassing and self-defeating as I believe this community could have some clout if we all sang from the same hymn sheet. For ebikers to have any credibility, we need to be perceived as lily-white but anyone reading through old threads would quickly discover that large numbers of our ilk have no regard for the law nor for fellow road users nor pedestrians, many taking delight in bragging about the illegality of their machines.

Any cyclist death/nasty motorist/dangerous truck or bus driver produces breathtaking hypocrisy on the part of some members here. Quick to complain about excessive vehicle speed, vengeful about untaxed or uninsured drivers, yet happy to tell all and sundry about their vehicle's ability to conquer everest-like hills without even pedalling.

As things stand we are less than popular among other cycling groups and I'm talking about those who represent the main body of cyclists in the uk, the ones who ride unpowered bikes. We ebikers have been pretty well ostracised by them and I believe we really ought to make efforts to get them onside as together, we would have a louder voice. As for ES, I just hope the DfT don't examine what some contributors to that forum profess to be EPACs or we will never achieve any concessions!

May I just add that I'm delighted you have recommenced posting on the forum and I have found some of your pieces highly enlightening. Inevitably, regardless of what you write there will be some, as you have encountered, who disagree which, in itself, is no bad thing provided any counter argument is constructive. Sadly, that doesn't always follow and I agree with the contributor who suggested you have the patience of a saint.

I'd like to finish by suggesting a better idea but I'm sorry to say I don't have a good idea on the subject making this another of those non-constructive posts. In practical terms, it will matter little if new legislation is introduced rendering all existing material obsolete. Why? For the simple reason that those who choose to wilfully ignore currents law will not be content to adhere to any legislation in regard to ebikes....ever!

Regards,
Indalo

ps The OED committee who consider new words for inclusion and decide on whether old words should be consigned to the archives look frequently at the word 'fora' as no-one has ever used it in speaking, outside of a lecture hall, since 1837. I'd be delighted to join you if you're determined to continue using it in these forums.

 

[jackhandy]

Maybe one way of recruiting more people to taking a pro-active approach to getting the statutes sorted in our favour could be to have information prominently available at the several ebike events already being proposed for 2013.

Although the number of active members on here is quite small, a lot of threads show a lot of hits, which tells me there's a goodly number of interested people out there, just not prepared to speak up: To be honest, some recent threads have been dominated by overbearing, biased posters not interested in any opinion they don't share.

If we can come up with a reasonably widely-held agenda, acceptable to enough of a majority on here & present it at those events, perhaps the snowball just may start rolling.

Probably just another flying pig, but who knows?

 

[shemozzle999]

The consumer voice can be very powerful if organized but I think the trade lobby will have the ear of the government purely because that is their major concern.

A joined up collaboration between the two camps would have more influence rather than two separate bodies.

I think if I remember correctly, that there was an open invitation offered by BEBA for anyone wishing to contribute to join in the lobby, perhaps now is the time for that offer to be taken up, if still available.

There must be agreement on the goals that have a chance of being achieved rather than a full out we want everything approach.

I see the problem as the definition of where the dividing line between ebikes and moped should be placed.

The proposals so far seem to indictcate that although 350W is not on the EU table this can be circumnavigated by not clamping down on the ability to fiddle with the controller after the equipment has been approved leading us back to the present problems we currently enjoy.

 

[Jeremy]

If there was general agreement on objectives by both a trade body and consumers (perhaps a tall order) then I think a combined approach that makes it clear that there is representation by both consumers and vendors could be a better plan.

Personally I don't have a particular issue with the EU EPAC regulations, other than some reservations about the way that throttles are limited in function. The major unresolved issue seems to be that the UK regulations that have been used to supposedly cover kit and DIY ebike builds cannot easily be applied and are outdated.

If the government are serious about not outlawing existing ebikes and if they are also serious about allowing the conversion of existing bikes to ebikes to continue, then there has to be a straightforward way to allow this.

Clearly a kit or component supplier has no way of being able to regulate either the speed or the weight of an ebike built using their parts. For example, I could buy a hub motor kit intended for a 20" wheel bike and fit it to a 26" wheel bike and get a theoretical 30% speed increase.

Given this, and given that speed and weight determine safety in the main, it seems that, as said before, it is in the interests of both consumers and suppliers that there be a straightforward way of ensuring that kit or DIY ebike conversions can be declared legal.

The simplest way would be a self-declaration by the person that builds the ebike. This works with deregulated very light aircraft, the builder declares the maximum empty weight and wing area and can then register and fly the aeroplane with no inspections or other checks. In the event of an accident these things can be easily checked and action taken against the owner if the declaration is found to be false. If the DfT can accept this for aeroplanes then I cannot for the life of me see why they cannot accept something similar for a kit or DIY ebike conversion.

That then leaves the thorny problem of higher powered ebikes. This is an area that I think is likely to take a lot more work to resolve. The starting point of the DfT is bound to be that existing light moped legislation is adequate. Making an argument for a halfway house between existing low powered ebikes and light mopeds may be a struggle. Even just agreeing on what we might collectively like to see in terms of a reduction in regulation from the light moped category requirements might be difficult.

Perhaps the time has come to split this discussion out of this thread and into one with a better title.

 

[shemozzle999]

Yes, it might be good to start one to try and establish the common goals and put them in order of priority.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

So how many did we decide were actually approved for use on UK roads? Now let me see. There was the Sinclaire Zyke, the Sinclair C5 and the err watchmacallit, the one with the little wheels, the blue one and the err um - thats it! Interesting thread.

 

[shemozzle999]

So how many did we decide were actually approved for use on UK roads? Now let me see. There was the Sinclaire Zyke, the Sinclair C5 and the err watchmacallit, the one with the little wheels, the blue one and the err um - thats it! Interesting thread.

So what do you suggest then?

 

[Deleted member 4366]

So what do you suggest then?

Carry on riding our bikes. Try not to be too irresponsible except when you see guys wearing lycra. Try to help those that need it, give generously to those with less than yourself, and generally try to be nice to everyone - as far as they let you.

 

[jazper53]

Carry on riding our bikes. Try not to be too irresponsible except when you see guys wearing lycra. Try to help those that need it, give generously to those with less than yourself, and generally try to be nice to everyone - as far as they let you.

Saint d8veh

 

[shemozzle999]

Fair point. 1st option then:

1. Do nothing.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

The consumer voice can be very powerful if organized but I think the trade lobby will have the ear of the government purely because that is their major concern.

A joined up collaboration between the two camps would have more influence rather than two separate bodies.

I think if I remember correctly, that there was an open invitation offered by BEBA for anyone wishing to contribute to join in the lobby, perhaps now is the time for that offer to be taken up, if still available.

There must be agreement on the goals that have a chance of being achieved rather than a full out we want everything approach.

I absolutely agree Shemozzle.

BEBA have been working hard with the DfT and all concerned parties such as TRL, CTC and BAGB to bring much needed clarity to the market. Although BEBA membership is steadily growing with some of the bigger names showing interest in coming on board in the new year, it is a shame that more importers, distributors and dealers are not getting behind BEBA to create an even more unified voice. Maybe it's time that we all put aside petty politics and started working together as a team? BEBA are keen to welcome all good electric bike suppliers as long as they can live up to the BEBA code of practice, which is there to simply protect consumers. BEBA membership is not cheap at £395 for full members and £195 for retailers with Active members investing a lot more in time and travel. However if the electric bike market is to be taken seriously we really do need to work together with a unified voice.

BEBA has discussed making a new membership category available to enthusiasts at a much lower price, does anyone think this would be worthwhile at this stage?

BEBA's last meeting with the DfT and TRL at the Home Office was very successful, and full details including all the presentations are available for those companies that have supported the industry both alone and through BEBA they can be found in the BEBA members' Dropbox.

Here is a short synopsis for Pedelec readers.

DfT/TRL EAPC Regulation Review Workshop 19 November 2012

Introduction (TRL & DfT)

All e-bikes (throttle only capability beyond 6 km/h) would be in scope of the Regulation and would need to be EU Type Approved if sold in sufficient quantities.

Vehicles outside of the Regulation’s scope (i.e. pedelecs ≤250W and ≤25km/h and individually built cycles) would be subject to individual Member State requirements.

Power limit

There were no objections expressed to a 250W power limit being the dividing threshold between EAPCs (250W or below) and motorised vehicles (anything over 250W).

Weight limits

There were no objections to removing the weight limits from the current EAPC regs.

E-bikes (twist & go)

Further consensus was evident that there should be no distinction in GB in-use law between pedelecs and e-bikes; the 250W power limit and 25 km/h speed limit were sufficient.

There were thus two main categories envisaged:

1. Pedelecs meeting the “out of scope” definition of the EU Framework Regulation, but conformingto CEN Standard EN15194;

2. Twist & Go e-bikes meeting the ≤250W and ≤25km/h requirements but still being in scope of the Framework Regulation and thus subject to EU Type Approval

Data plates

It was agreed that it would be sufficient for EU Type Approved e-bikes to display the statutory plate required by the approval regulations.

There is, no requirement for system voltage to be limited or displayed, either in EU Type Approval or by EN15194.

Speed pedelecs,

i.e. bicycles powered by motors >250W and capable of providing motor assistance > 25 km/h (e.g. up to 40 km/h). These can currently be registered and used as mopeds provided they are type approved, the rider wears a motorcycle helmet, has the correct driving licence, insurance and taxed.

I hope that gives a little more clarity.

Anyone wanting to get behind the industry by joining the team at BEBA please drop me a line and I will arrange for a membership pack to go out to them.

All the best

David