Is it road-legal to restrict a 500W motor?

[flecc]

P.S
If the definition of an electric motor as used by Politicians in the creation of Law (the definition will be in Hansard somewhere) has changed then I for one is unaware of it.

Yours sincerely

Linfitter.

The UK's EAPC law defined the status 7 years after that speech, which of course has no legal status. The EAPC 1983 regulation 200 watts motor power is defined in the British Standards test BS1727 which defines not just the motor but the battery as well.

However, that status is now academic since the DfT have accepted the use of 250 watt e-bikes pending the full introduction of an EU style law revision for the UK, currently intended for 2016. We will in due course also pair that with EN15194 which precisely defines the EU rules on motor power.

I have a full copy of William Whitlock's speech as reported in Hansard, together with the responses from the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Kenneth Marks) and the subsequent exchanges, should that be required.

 

[103Alex1]

you can build a legal CST bike like kudos do - why bother with a switch?

I don't think Kudos use the same 270rpm CST motors as the 500W-rated ones supplied by BMS Battery. Perhaps they can clarify.

You need to run the BMS ones with +/- 30A controllers and big batteries / high discharge ones to get the 'private land performance' (!) Out of interest, wonder what would happen to the Kudos variants in terms of performance if you swapped the controller and battery.

 

[CycloTricity]

Hi folks!

Bringing an old thread back to life here, and am doing so with such great pleasure!

What started off as a brainstorming session on this very thread has now been completely developed and fully commercialized! And it is all thanks to the input people participated with here which prompted certain ideas of how to do this.
So I'm thrilled to announce we now have introduced our high powered rear wheel conversion kits!

http://www.cyclotricity.com/rear-drive-electric-bike-kit/

All kits are restricted to 250W by default of course. But if you get the LCD display, you could enter a code to unlock the full speed/power! Change the code and you'll be back to 250W again

This is not the same as a standard de-restriction switch that you get on the handlebar. We've done more research on this matter since the first posts here, and found that flecc is pretty much spot on. An immediate means of de-restricting a kit is questionable under the eyes of the law. But to change the factory software settings is a different matter (as different settings apply to different countries/laws around the world).

We will disclose the LCD software codes to customers only against signing our de-restriction terms of use ensuring customers understand the legal implications of de-restricting the kit and that they are prohibited form sharing it or using it on-road at that mode.

Ok, enough of the boring bit. The stunning bit is how much of a different ride more power can give! I have to say, the 1000W version is an absolutely exhilarating experience! (Almost becoming an addiction!).
So for the thrill seekers among us (you know who you are!), you don't have to get a powerful kit and be an outcast kept in your private land anymore. If you wish to use your kit sensibly and safely on-road, you can now configure it for such journeys as well!

We've kept all prices low inline with the CycloTricty ethos and all supported by a dealership network. Please check us out!

 

[D8ve]

Nice usp and marketing.
I like it.
Even if it's not for me.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

It's great to see you new kits. It's getting harder and harder to choose now. I reckon that they'll sell well.

There's one thing I don't understand though. When you say that they're restricted to 250w, what does that mean? Is that output or input power? Peak or average?

 

[amigafan2003]

I know where d8veh is going with the above.

I've been on 250w rated EN5194 compliant bikes that have pulled almost 1000 watts from the battery.............................................

 

[shemozzle999]

Raising the "nobody knows paddle" here.

The responses given to the OP's original question are untried and untested in law and until they are they place all the risk on the consumer.

Many manufacturers have now developed and are marketing similar bikes.

Personally I would be very wary about purchasing one them and advise others not to buy them until the new regulations have been defined.

 

[trex]

...
Ok, enough of the boring bit. The stunning bit is how much of a different ride more power can give! I have to say, the 1000W version is an absolutely exhilarating experience! (Almost becoming an addiction!).
...

1000W? surely not ...
Have you thought of the probability that the wheel will come off?

 

[Geebee]

1000W? surely not ...
Have you thought of the probability that the wheel will come off?

There is thousands of BSO's running around with 1000w motors stuck in them from Ebay, you don't see them littering the road side due to breakages.

Having said that its a shady way to sell illegal ebikes.

 

[trex]

perhaps we should debate the 'arm race' among manufacturers escalating motor power.
The P hub for example sells on its power.
The BPM sells on its power.
I can sympathize with people buying the P hub or the BPM motor on the basis of need (when they are overweighed and having to cope with big hills, although I think the answer should be an XD motor or a crank drive rather than a big powerful motor) but why a 1000W motor? who needs it? if it's for fun then I am sorry to say, the market is tiny.

 

[amigafan2003]

1000W? surely not ...
Have you thought of the probability that the wheel will come off?

What?

I ran 2500 watts through my MAC front motor and it didn't fall off.......................

Ok, when I nailed the throttle it left a 10 ft black line on the cycle path, but that's besides the point

but why a 1000W motor? who needs it?

Who NEEDS a full carbon fibre racing bike? No one. But you see loads of them about.

Who needs a car with a 3.8 V6, twin turbo engine? No one. But I see plenty of GTR's about.

As for there not being a market for powerful ebikes - I wouldn't be so sure - Alien bikes seemed to sell a few (not sure if sales were the reason they went kaput though) and Xipi still seems to be trading. Also, there is a lot to be said for aiming for a market segment that few others operate in, even if it's a small market.

A 50% share of 10% of the market is better than a 5% share of 90% of the market.

 

[shambolic]

Something that occurs to me, is where does this all stand with insurance. It seems they have a Carte Blanche on get outs should any pay outs be required.

 

[amigafan2003]

Something that occurs to me, is where does this all stand with insurance. It seems they have a Carte Blanche on get outs should any pay outs be required.

Whom do you mean by they? The rider or the seller?

If it's the rider - then obviously a rider of a non compliant ebike will not be covered by insurance.

If it's the seller - well - there's nothing wrong with selling non compliant ebikes as long as they are honest about it, so there shouldn't be any insurance come back on them. Technically, there could be a comeback if the base bike wasn't BS compliant, but they probably are compliant, so again wont be an issue as long as they're selling them with reflectors etc.

The only real way to be sure would be to have the scenario tested in court, we'll see if the next 5 years as a magistrate throws any interesting cases up ;-)

But we're talking hypotheticals again - and people spend too much time worrying about or debating hypotheticals.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

The responses given to the OP's original question are untried and untested in law and until they are they place all the risk on the consumer.

Many manufacturers have now developed and are marketing similar bikes.

EN15194 allows any motor that's rated at 250w by the manufacturer without specifying the method of rating, so if Bafang put a 250w marking on the motor, its allowed. There is a standard for verifying the rating of a motor refereed to in EN15194 but it only tests for over-rating, not under-rating, i.e. if it can run at 250w without overheating or stalling out, it'll pass. This would mean that the bikes with "250w" Bosch motors, Bafang BPm, Bafang CST, Dapu, etc are completely compliant with EN15194 regardless of how much current goes through the motor provided that the manufacturers mark it or show it in a catalogue as 250w.

Occasionally, factories get their motors mixed up and fit what appears to be the same motor, but marked 350w. In my interpretation, these bikes are non-compliant, so not EPACs.

In the absence of a rating from the manufacturer, there's an acceleration test to verify the power of the motor, so if you or the the manufacturer have restricted the power somehow, the bike would have to pass that test, but my interpretation is that if the motor's marked 500w or 1000w, it's still non-compliant. It would be much better for Cyclotricity if the manufacturer marked the motors 250w, and gave them a certificate to show that it passes EN 60034-1, Rotating electrical machines – Part 1: Rating and performance.

To summarise, I agree with the sentiments of your statements, but there's a fundamental difference between bikes with high power motors that the motor manufacturers say are 250w, and somebody fitting a 1000w motor and trying to convince someone that it's been restricted. You can't restrict a motor to a nominal rating of 250w because that has no precise meaning. Restricting the current to it doesn't change it's "nominal rating".

At the moment it still seems that nobody is checking and nobody has been prosecuted. I wonder how long that will go on for. I reckon until they tidy up all the regulations.

 

[trex]

I am sure the manufacturers know what they are doing and duly take legal advice. The fact remains that they (the vendors) market their bikes as having more torque (read power) than xyz, so power becomes the main yardstick, a 'weedy' SWX motor that can't climb 7% hill without pedalling is at a distinct disadvantage against this kind of marketing. This is to me inviting more vendors to join the power race and be more liberal with their interpretation of the laws. Instead of investing in R&D and innovate, they just fit a bigger motor for more or less the same cost to them.

 

[shambolic]

Whom do you mean by they? The rider or the seller?

If it's the rider - then obviously a rider of a non compliant ebike will not be covered by insurance.

If it's the seller - well - there's nothing wrong with selling non compliant ebikes as long as they are honest about it, so there shouldn't be any insurance come back on them. Technically, there could be a comeback if the base bike wasn't BS compliant, but they probably are compliant, so again wont be an issue as long as they're selling them with reflectors etc.

The only real way to be sure would be to have the scenario tested in court, we'll see if the next 5 years as a magistrate throws any interesting cases up ;-)

But we're talking hypotheticals again - and people spend too much time worrying about or debating hypotheticals.

No I'm talking about any insurance companies you insure the bike with. We all know how much work they put into finding ways out of paying up and all these grey areas will be grist to the mill for them.

 

[amigafan2003]

Depends who's at fault and how serious the accident is I suppose.

If it's a "non fault" accident for the rider, then I don't think it will matter as they'll claim costs back from the third party - your insurance company wouldn't be interested in your bike at all and the third party will be trying to settle for the least amount possible. If it's a fault claim for the rider, then that's where it might get more complicated - a simple traffic collision with no serious injuries then I doubt they'll even want to look at the bike. A serious accident with police involvement and the bike being kept for inspection? That's anyone's guess as to how that would turn out.

It's a bit of a myth about insurance companies trying to weasel out of their responsibilities - it's often cheaper to settle quickly than it is to dispute claims - which usually requires costly court hearings and/or ombudsman involvement.

But again, we're in the realms of speculation and it's a discussion with only one answer - and answer that results in the scenario actually happening and recording the result.

 

[tillson]

No I'm talking about any insurance companies you insure the bike with. We all know how much work they put into finding ways out of paying up and all these grey areas will be grist to the mill for them.

If the electric bike is a non-compliant electric bike, then as far as the insurance companies are concerned it isn't a, "bicycle" and they will say that motor insurance should have been obtained. If no motor insurance is held, then the rider will become personally responsible for funding any compensation due for personal injury to a third party, or damage to property.

If the electric bike is legal, you will almost certainly find that home insurance will cover for third party injury and damage to property.

Of course, this relies on an accident occurring whereby the legality of the bike being ridden becomes a factor. Some view the scenario as being extremely unlikely to occur and are happy to take the risk.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

We've discussed what might or might not happen with a non-compliant bike on several occasions before. I thought that this thread was about whether you could make a non-compliant bike compliant by restricting it somehow. If you can, there's no problem with insurance.

 

[baldylox]

Are these kits based on the MAC motors?