Unsurprisingly I'd never heard of Coboc, but the first link to come up using a Google search, was actually for this Scott.
http://www.rutlandcycling.com/320989/products/2015-scott-e-sub-speed-electric-bike-green.aspx?origin={adtype}&kwd={keyword}¤cy=GBP
I'd have that any day of the week over the Coboc. Low weight is all well an good, but it isn't going to be of any use when the bike falls apart due to possible weakness in strength, after six months of British pot holed roads.
The Scott whilst heavier, probably has better geometry, (something only mentioned once here) could actually be used away from flat area's, will be far more durable and usable, and being blunt is a far superior bike, at half the cost. The name Scott could be swapped for countless other brands, but it just happened to come up first, so used as an example. Weight saving is something that we all want, but I'd sooner know that durability and range has been factored in.
We keep reading wild claims about the spec of bikes, it could be time to put these claims to the test by sending out bikes to forum users to test for a few months. Rather than a full review, a standard tick box could be used for forum feed back, plus a high/low points written piece at the end.
In respect of road bikes, the test should be carried out on hilly, not on flat terrain, and in respect of off road bikes, not on hard packed gravel tracks. James, you can be the first to come forward and offer both types of bikes.