L1e-A testing requirements

[flecc]

I don't see that attractive to even an e-moped,if I was considering such a machine I would want to go faster and therefore this category seems somewhat redundant.
KudosDave

As it's always been for years under the old name of "Low Powered Moped", with no-one ever making them.

The only advantage I've ever seen is for a disabled person or limited ability rider, able to ride almost any road incline without pedalling thanks to the 1000 watts.
.

 

[shemozzle999]

Now that all the different types of throttle appear to be allowed for L1e-A and if fitted with a motor that meets the UK EAPC definition:

"the motor shouldn’t have a maximum power output of more than 250 watts"

then they will be classed as bicycles in the eyes of the UK authorities.

Whether the EU will object to the UK will be a matter for them to decide.

 

[craiggor]

As it's always been for years under the old name of "Low Powered Moped", with no-one ever making them.

The only advantage I've ever seen is for a disabled person or limited ability rider, able to ride almost any road incline without pedalling thanks to the 1000 watts.
.

The petrol ones used to be made in large numbers.That's why they have there own L-class.I'm making one.This is good news to me.I thought it would have to be a rush job to get it done,before September to keep my throttle.

 

[flecc]

The petrol ones used to be made in large numbers.

It was electric ones I was referring to of course. However, were those petrol ones all restricted to a maximum assist speed of 15 mph? Any that were faster weren't Low Powered Mopeds.
.

 

[craiggor]

It was electric ones I was referring to of course. However, were those petrol ones all restricted to a maximum assist speed of 15 mph? Any that were faster weren't Low Powered Mopeds.
.

Not sure if the cycle motor/autocycle had speed restrictions.They where before the MSVA.Do you know what people used to do before the MSVA? Was it just take it down the local garage to get a engineers report.The ones i mean all had bicycle tyres so must be L1E-a .

 

[flecc]

Not sure if the cycle motor/autocycle had speed restrictions.They where before the MSVA.Do you know what people used to do before the MSVA? Was it just take it down the local garage to get a engineers report.The ones i mean all had bicycle tyres so must be L1E-a .

They didn't as far as I knew, so were not Low Powered Mopeds. I don't think anyone ever made a Low Powered Moped, so it was really a redundant class.

There were no L1 classes back then, there was only Low Powered Moped (up to 1000 watts and limited to 15 mph) and the familiar and popular 30 mph Moped class.

It's only very recently in the last three years that the EU have been tidying things up in type approval. L1-A replaces the Low Powered Moped class and L1-B the Moped class. The electric versions are L1e-A and L1e-B.

SVA is just the single vehicle version of type approval, intended for self builds and grey imports.

Before EU type approval and SVA, I don't know what happened with single builds. I think they were just expected to conform to existing classes of vehicles and don't know what the inspection regime was, if any. As far as the law was concerned, they were all motorcycles, even add-on bicycle motors meant a full motorcycle driving licence and registration and tax.
.

 

[anotherkiwi]

My on again off again love affair with s-pedelecs continues. Current thought is if/when a decent helmet law comes into play just take the risk of speed cameras when free-wheeling downhill at +60 km/h. It is the same kind of risk most car drivers take every day.

For the range issue I finally figured it out: s-pedelec = 2 x Wh in half the travel time. More or less it would come to roughly the same number of Wh for the same distance.

 

[soundwave]

i can get 23-28 miles depending on how fast i go and how much effort i put in.

 

[flecc]

For the range issue I finally figured it out: s-pedelec = 2 x Wh in half the travel time. More or less it would come to roughly the same number of Wh for the same distance.

When the S pedelecs were all 250 watts there was a rough range ratio for identical models with the two Panasonic units.

The standard version giving 30 miles range on it's 10 Ah battery with a given user, the S version 25 miles.
.

 

[shemozzle999]

As predicted, MCIA and the BAGB now trying to take claim over powered cycles L1e-a vehicles by redefining them as mopeds, for clarity , and the dust isn't even settled on the regulations. Dealers would be misselling if they called them mopeds.

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/when-does-an-e-bike-become-a-moped/019573

 

[shemozzle999]

Perhaps the forum now needs a separate powered cycle section for discussion on this new exciting area of type approved vehicles.

With a European market place of over 500 million potential customers and now the possibility of designing practical multi wheeled vehicles for goods carriers, people carriers, mobile trading and personal daily commuting dealers could expand their business into this new area as the Pedelec dealer market appears to have reached saturation.

In or out of Europe these vehicles, if approved, can be placed on the European market and be manufactured globally.

Many existing products would only need minor modification to satisfy the type approval regulations

 

[shemozzle999]

New document belatedly placed in the 11 May meeting page:

https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/c831d292-2b0b-4535-8367-59f7a8430d67/4_Categorisation cycles designed to pedal_Regulation 168_2013.pdf

Explains the inclusion of throttles for L1e-A class vehicles and also confirms their "intentional" ban on the use of EPACs throttles for the disadvantaged and elderly.

 

[flecc]

New document belatedly placed in the 11 May meeting page:

https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/c831d292-2b0b-4535-8367-59f7a8430d67/4_Categorisation cycles designed to pedal_Regulation 168_2013.pdf

Explains the inclusion of throttles forL1e-A class and also confirms their "intentional" ban on the use of EPACs throttles for the disadvantaged and elderly.

Indeed, the position continues to be unpromising. They seem quite determined to keep 168/2013 as it is.
.

 

[shemozzle999]

It now confirms that the Commission takes full responsibility for the current situation and that they and only they would be answerable to the question of justification of the decision should a challenge be made against it.

 

[flecc]

It now confirms that the Commission takes full responsibility for the current situation and that they and only they would be answerable to the question of justification of the decision should a challenge be made against it.

Where a challenge is concerned much will depend on the provision of a type approval class for a throttle equipped pedelec. I couldn't see a challenge succeeding anywhere that is provided, since the user would not suffer any discrimination.
.

 

[craiggor]

Is there a law saying if the vehicle is to be adapted for use by a disabled person,it does not need to go for SVA ? It was the first question asked to the guy from VOSA when he was answering question's on the trike forum.This was back in 2010/11.The answer back then was yes that's OK no SVA.If this is still true it is the person not the vehicle that gets the exemption.Still no good to people who are not disabled.None electric bike owners i talk to don't know what a pedelec is.They all think you use a throttle.



Sent from my D101 using Tapatalk

 

[flecc]

Is there a law saying if the vehicle is to be adapted for use by a disabled person,it does not need to go for SVA ? It was the first question asked to the guy from VOSA when he was answering question's on the trike forum.This was back in 2010/11.The answer back then was yes that's OK no SVA.If this is still true it is the person not the vehicle that gets the exemption.

That must still be true since the more extreme modifications to cars fo disabled use could never get through either type approval or SVA.

But as you rightly say, this is no use to pedelecers whose needs fall short of disability. Since the EU is so determined not to change the exemption specification, we need a pedelec type approval class at least, and preferably the equivalent SVA option for self build.
.

 

[craiggor]

That must still be true since the more extreme modifications to cars fo disabled use could never get through either type approval or SVA.

But as you rightly say, this is no use to pedelecers whose needs fall short of disability. Since the EU is so determined not to change the exemption specification, we need a pedelec type approval class at least, and preferably the equivalent SVA option for self build.
.

Yes,as you said before all the homebuilder can HOPE for is to be legal if he complies to the rules.I am sure if I ran in to someone they could get a lawyer to prove my bike was illegal.

Sent from my D101 using Tapatalk

 

[anotherkiwi]

OK I think I have got my head around it now:

In the same way that national requirements are stopping the sale and use of s-pedelecs in all countries bar 3 or 4 it is the moped equipment requirements for L1e-A that stop it being useful for people who require throttles. Effectively, bundling low speed powered bicycles in with mopeds rather than with pedelecs in their requirements is the error. Not the existence of the L1e-A class itself.

Is that within the scope of national regulations too?

Shouldn't your real battle be the removal of moped equipment requirements from L1e-A?

 

[flecc]

Shouldn't your real battle be the removal of moped equipment requirements from L1e-A?

That's under EU control and type approval regulations for L1e-A and L1e-B are still being finalised by them.

The original draft shows some easements of the requirements for L1e-A, but some of these are bound to change. For example the draft regulation states that a number plate space is not necessary for L1e-A. That's never going to meet all 28 national requirements, least of all the UK's.
.