Legal Pitfalls

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,054
30,510
How is it not true. You have just added a load of extra conditions which are not applicable to what I have written. I said most people in the world use throttles with ebikes and as those markets are huge like China, India, most of Asia, South America, Africa, North America and many other countries 'most' would apply. Many of the Chinese ebikes we see in Europe are adapted to sell in Europe they don't have pedelec features when sold in China and most other markets. Ebike kits often have pedelec systems added which don't even work that well. Those voilamart kits work beautifully with a throttle but the basic implementation of the pedelec system means as soon as you rotate the pedals you dangerously get full power which is both dangerous and more damaging to the battery. The pedelec system is in minority use in the world and the fact you deny that shows just how warped your viewpoint has become.

Also from all the videos I've seen where a ebike is sold with both a pedelec system and a full range throttle in the USA for example there is a very high skew towards use of the throttle over or active with the pedelec system. I.e. the majority of ebike riders use throttle control.

The percentage of ebikes sold in the world with only a pedelec system is going to be very low. Even here in the UK a huge number of Chinese brand and imported from Asia ebikes come with a throttle control which you have to activate in the settings to get to work by a secret menu typically.

Remember a huge number of ebikes in the world are sold with basic controllers with litle logic and in India brushed motor ebike kits are huge sellers which are throttle only.

The only companies selling purely pedal assist/pedelec type ebikes seems to be European brands who are typically very high priced and only niche sellers in the US for example.

There is a statistic here that shows in China how much an average ebike costs compared to Europe and the US.


View attachment 50531

Ultimately readers will have to decide who is telling porkies and who is being factual. I completely stand by my comments that most people in the world use throttles with ebikes and most of those don't even have the option to choose pedal assist as not even fitted to their ebikes.
Distortion, the Chinese don't ride the sort of pedelecs they mainly sell to us. They ride what are mopeds with circa 700 watt ratings with either no pedals or vestigial pedals that can only propel at very low speeds which they never use. They have also sent those to us but the takeup here has been very low. The same is true elsewhere in the orient where what are essentially mopeds are commonly seen with as many as whole families on board. Those are what pass as e-bikes in most of the orient, Japan being an exception to some extent due to their stronger law.

And in Africa and India** e-bikes scarcely exist. Once again you know next to nothing about the subject, seeming to think what you imagine is fact.

Why not stick to the subject, which is that there is no need to change the pedelec law when all needs are catered for with other laws.

While I understand you don't intend it, you are being very selfish. The pedelec law is a universal one to provide assistance for all cyclists needing it, which of course includes all the children who ride bicycles. In consequence many children in mainland Europe, especially the Netherlands, do ride pedelecs. So the safety aspects of the power and speed limits and how they are controlled by limiting within pedalling ability are important.

If you want an e-bike instead of a pedelec, just buy or create an L1e-A e-bike (Low Powered Moped) which is superior to any pedelec with throttle. Or, if like many, you want more speed and power to suit for your cycling, buy an L1e-B (S-class e-bike ).

Everyone is catered for, there is no need to mess with the excellent pedelec law. It is utterly pointless to rant as you are doing anyway, since the pedelec law will not change. It is indeed the only world standard in e-biking, with so many countries following it change is nigh on impossible now.

**Afrobarometer survey findings from 34 African countries show little progress in electrification. While experiences vary by country, on average access to a power grid improved by just 4 percentage points over the past decade. And even where connections to the grid exist, unreliable supply remains a major problem.

India currently reports 99.4% electrification, yet there are 304 million people who still lack access to electricity according to the recent draft of the National Energy Policy . In most countries, electrification means not only being connected to the grid but also providing homes and businesses sufficient electricity access to meet their daily needs. However, in India, the definition of electrification in rural areas, where most of the unelectrified population lives, has been detached from the actual supply of electricity to households.
.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zlatan and EddiePJ

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,289
So lets gets this straight according to your logic. A mid-drive motor that could apply up to 5x the power of a weaker rider 100Nm vs 20Nm is not the cause of a chain breaking it is in fact the rider? Surely this is not debatable a mid-drive motor at peak up a hill can put huge additional strain on a chain compared to a conventional bicycle and the forums are full of people on mid-drive ebikes who have snapped chains and worn them down very quickly. I totally accept good practice and perhaps a shifting sensor here and there can improve things but compared to a hub motor ebike the hub motor works separately to the drivetrain so takes off a huge amount of strain/load on the drivetrain. So not only are chain snaps much less common than mid-drive motors they are much less common than even conventional bicycles.
I, m 110kg, my chain snapping days are years behind me and were all on ordinary mtb. And, ofcourse, I, m not saying crank drives do not experience more chain wear than their hub counterpart but if you took the time to study the maths properly with your supposition crank drives snap chains you, d realise that particular issue is almost irrelevant. Folk on emtb snap chains not because they are crank drives but because of abuse and general hard use some emtb users put their bikes through. I, m around 240lb, standing with my weight on pedal, that translates to around 180ftlb torque, and it can be applied under shock, (ie panic). At times momentarily way more. That's the chain snapper not the essentially tiny motor at crank. The whole point of motor is to apply torque not in massive pulses (as in cycling) but as a much lower but constant figure. ie evenly over entire full rotation.
I,ve now done around 10,000 miles with emtb, 90% off road. Always highest setting,up and down hard Derbyshire climbs. Yet to snap a chain. Probably 5 chains worn out and 4 cassettes.?? Crank drives do not, categorically, snap chains. Its a silly rumour put about by hub drive advocates.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EddiePJ and flecc

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,054
30,510
Crank drives do not, categorically, snap chains. Its a silly rumour put about by hub drive advocates.
Like our "single point of failure" obsessed member ! :)

I've owned crank drive and hub drives front and rear, but the only chain I ever snapped was in my unassisted days, just using my own strength in hill climbing.
.
 

EddiePJ

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jul 7, 2013
4,632
4,012
Crowborough, East Sussex
www.facebook.com
I, m 110kg, my chain snapping days are years behind me and were all on ordinary mtb. And, ofcourse, I, m not saying crank drives do not experience more chain wear than their hub counterpart but if you took the time to study the maths properly with your supposition crank drives snap chains you, d realise that particular issue is almost irrelevant. Folk on emtb snap chains not because they are crank drives but because of abuse and general hard use some emtb users put their bikes through. I, m around

I, m 110kg, my chain snapping days are years behind me and were all on ordinary mtb. And, ofcourse, I, m not saying crank drives do not experience more chain wear than their hub counterpart but if you took the time to study the maths properly with your supposition crank drives snap chains you, d realise that particular issue is almost irrelevant. Folk on emtb snap chains not because they are crank drives but because of abuse and general hard use some emtb users put their bikes through. I, m around 240lb, standing with my weight on pedal, that translates to around 180ftlb torque, and it can be applied under shock, (ie panic). At times momentarily way more. That's the chain snapper not the essentially tiny motor at crank. The whole point of motor is to apply torque not in massive pulses (as in cycling) but as a much lower but constant figure. ie evenly over entire full rotation.
I,ve now done around 10,000 miles with emtb, 90% off road. Always highest setting,up and down hard Derbyshire climbs. Yet to snap a chain. Probably 5 chains worn out and 4 cassettes.?? Crank drives do not, categorically, snap chains. Its a silly rumour put about by hub drive advocates.

You sound like me.


In my 15 years of riding emtb's etc, I have never
snapped a chain. The one exception being on my analogue mtb. If anyone was going to suffer from a snapped chain, I suspect that it would be me.

I would be curious to see the forum links for all of the ones that have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zlatan

soundwave

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 23, 2015
16,600
6,397
i got 1000 miles on the chain i got now and still at 2,5 and change at 5.0 but i only killed 1 chain as the top fkn jockey wheel exploded and one of the power links snapped as i kept re using it ;)

im still only on my 2nd cassette and use metal jockey wheels now but do make more noise but i got a axs gx to go on it now see if i can brake that multi shifting going 35mph :oops:

DSC_0014_02.JPG
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zlatan

jimriley

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 17, 2020
576
389
For quite a while now any equipment used on any boats must meet minimum standards, and be certified as such. (with clear marking on equipment and relevant paper work.) This is both the case for new boats (definetely barges) and for any boat to pass mandatory boat safety inspections. (regs cover stuff like gas storage, fridges, cookers, electrical devices and stoves)
Individual builders (with relevant training) can self certify (or could when I was involved) certain requirements. (eg placement of gas cupboards) but items such as wood burning stoves must have past testing and be stamped accordingly.(I, d guess CO2 emissions)
Stove in question had no markings. (at time CE marks), and would have failed boat inspection.(was a new one but by letter of law irrelevant)
If anyone is using any stove on British waterways without markings, it should fail boat inspection. Boat examiners might turn a blind eye on older boats but certainly not on new ones, but I doubt it. Imagine some owner expiring through CO2 poisoning a week or so after boat safety test?? Somebody would go to prison.
One of jobs I often had to do when involved with refitting old barges was remove some dangerous, often a home made excuse for a wood burner. Rules around barges, boats are equally as strict as for housing, in fact probably more so and rightly so.
Nah, no requirement to meet emissions requirement on a boat that I can find.
I have a woodstove on my narrowboat that passes the BSS.
They have to be fastened down, correctly sited away from flammable surfaces, sufficient ventilation etc. etc. Test is due next month (4 yearly cycle) and I am confident it will pass
At home I have a clean burn stove that meets the regs you raise, it's great, free heat with free seasoned wood. However we have cut back on its use, now only use it when it's really cold, while it's the best form of heating in our house it puts out PM2.5 particulates which can be nasty.
 

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,289
Nah, no requirement to meet emissions requirement on a boat that I can find.
I have a woodstove on my narrowboat that passes the BSS.
They have to be fastened down, correctly sited away from flammable surfaces, sufficient ventilation etc. etc. Test is due next month (4 yearly cycle) and I am confident it will pass
At home I have a clean burn stove that meets the regs you raise, it's great, free heat with free seasoned wood. However we have cut back on its use, now only use it when it's really cold, while it's the best form of heating in our house it puts out PM2.5 particulates which can be nasty.
If you are fitting in your own boat (or a second hand one) I don't think RCDs (recreation craft directives) are enforceable.(or pertinent) At time I was fitting out and selling new boats. You will only have to pass your boat safety inspection (which I, d assumed by now would be at similar standards to RCD)
We had to fit only Stoves clearly marked with CE stamps of . (I had to remove two, which although we were told (and sold as) having been tested. Hence the issue.
I, d still be very wary in any boat with a Woodburner not CE marked (or its new British replacement?) or without proof of fitting by registered fitters. It's not a risk worth taking even if it passes boat safety inspection, which I, m not convinced it would.
What you are saying is you could fit a home made stove? You can't.
Not sure but I believe since Brexit RCD has changed name. When I was building barges we had a files of RCDs sent as they became statutory. I think it's RCF now. Stoves were covered.
Screenshot_20230306_220610_com.android.chrome.jpg
Screenshot_20230306_220702_com.google.android.apps.docs.jpg

Stoves must show an EN number. It was a CE mark when I was involved.
I never mentioned anything about emissions etc but I, d guess that's part of testing to get EN /CE markings.

Having said all that your own link says it must be an EN marked stove and be fitted to minimum standards (BS something or other)???? by registered professionals??
 
Last edited:

jimriley

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 17, 2020
576
389
If you are fitting in your own boat (or a second hand one) I don't think RCDs (recreation craft directives) are enforceable.(or pertinent) At time I was fitting out and selling new boats. You will only have to pass your boat safety inspection (which I, d assumed by now would be at similar standards to RCD)
We had to fit only Stoves clearly marked with CE stamps of . (I had to remove two, which although we were told (and sold as) having been tested. Hence the issue.
I, d still be very wary in any boat with a Woodburner not CE marked (or its new British replacement?) or without proof of fitting by registered fitters. It's not a risk worth taking even if it passes boat safety inspection, which I, m not convinced it would.
What you are saying is you could fit a home made stove? You can't.
Not sure but I believe since Brexit RCD has changed name. When I was building barges we had a files of RCDs sent as they became statutory. I think it's RCF now. Stoves were covered.
View attachment 50564
View attachment 50565

Stoves must show an EN number. It was a CE mark when I was involved.
I never mentioned anything about emissions etc but I, d guess that's part of testing to get EN /CE markings.

Having said all that your own link says it must be an EN marked stove and be fitted to minimum standards (BS something or other)???? by registered professionals??
Rules don't say it MUST be fitted by a professional, only a recommendation. The illustration in your post only says that EN marked stoves are better, again no MUST. You are also presuming it's a home made stove, it's not. https://dowlingstoves.com/our stoves/little devil.html
While the stove came with the boat there is only the stove and hull below the gunnels left of the project I bought. Complete fit out after having a steel top welded on. I used the innards of a caravan for lots of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zlatan

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,289
Rules don't say it MUST be fitted by a professional, only a recommendation. The illustration in your post only says that EN marked stoves are better, again no MUST. You are also presuming it's a home made stove, it's not. https://dowlingstoves.com/our stoves/little devil.html
While the stove came with the boat there is only the stove and hull below the gunnels left of the project I bought. Complete fit out after having a steel top welded on. I used the innards of a caravan for lots of it.
At end of day it's entirely upto you. Even the RCDs I was working under were directives and at time (around 2001) it was a new scheme and builders could self certify (even putting on their own CE numbers) but that was for only a grace period.
Trying to establish a firm and selling boats with guarantees( and doing things "as directed") is a different boat to working on your own boat....
I, ve fitted my own Stove in my house.. And not a "EN/BS/Kite Mark" in site... Did fit it according to all regs but... I think its still risky nowadays.
I personally don't think you, d pass safety inspection if Stove doesn't show some markings... And by time you, ve followed all the guidance (as in both our links) its probably easier to simply pay for it fitting.. And let them take risk. (that was especially case with RCDs)
We had fitted 2 stoves supplied by customers. Was a massive mistake. (neither had CE markings)
I, ve fitted probably 15 barges out, certain jobs I now wouldn't contemplate... Major 240v electrical, any Gas (except coupling up) and stoves... Not because I can't... Don't want the comebacks.. And legislation.
It can come back to bite you.
But boats have always been the individualists home builders saviour.. (we are about last country to not enforce compulsory certification for boat use).
So, make a good job of it and you, ll be fine..I would try and find some markings on stove tho, or have a word with local surveyor/boat tester.
Nothing wrong with caravan stuff. It's fine..
Good luck. Sounds a good project..
 
Last edited:

TwoWheels1954

Finding my (electric) wheels
Feb 25, 2023
23
12
Well, a lot seems to have been posted here since mylast post. I can only say that my tardiness in replying is due to going on holiday and now in the full throws of having a new kitchen fitted!

Anyway, I promised all of those who contributed with advice to my original post an update so, here we go:

After reading your advice, I Emailed Wing and said that the bike wasn't fit for my purpose, i.e. riding it on the road and that he'd failed in his duty of care towards me as a customer in that, despite being aware that I wanted to ride it on the road, he never mentioned that it was illegal to do so. In fact, he actively encouraged me to do so. I received no reply so re-sent it the following day and again received no reply. I was on holiday at the time so it wasn't easy to do but none the less.

When I got home, there was still no reply, but I had an inkling that I was insured for legal expenses as part of my home contents policy and that proved to be the case. So, I phoned their legal helpline. The upshot of that conversation was that they agreed that I had a case and advised me to Email again quoting my Short Term Rights, rejecting the goods and asking for my money back.

After several days, he replied to my original Email saying that he'd just found it in his Spam Folder. He gave no response to my request for a refund but limited his response to the grounds for a refund that I'd quoted. He stated that "it wasn't his job to inform his customers of the law, they should find that out for themselves" he also insisted that the bike could be "easily modified to reduce the power and limit the speed". I was aware of the speed limiter at the time of purchase but didn't appreciate its relevance. My point would be that he was aware of my intention to ride on the road so, if it's so easy to make the bike road legal, why didn't he do that before I collected it? He also made the point that the bike was assembled to my specification, which is very twisted logic in that because I'd rejected two other bikes that he'd got in stock with 1000W motors, I was specifying that I wanted a 1500W motor!! Actually, I rejected the other two bikes because I didn't like their styling and said nothing about the size of motor on the model I was interested in buying.

There's more but I think you can get the drift from the above.

Following his reply, I again phoned the legal helpline and agreed to give him a final chance to respond positively and sent a further Email quoting my rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and again requesting a refund.

One of the interesting points from my legal discussions is that you don't need to state your reasons for rejecting the goods provided that you do so within 30 days and quote your Short Term Rights under the above legislation.

He has responded by quoting his Terms and Conditions which relate to his interpretation of the legislation. According to him, he will only countenance a refund if the goods are faulty or not fit for purpose. He insists that the bike is fit for purpose. It'll be interesting to see what happens in a legal contest between his Terms and Conditions and Statutory Rights.

Where it's at now is that I've completed a claim form, submitted it to my insurers and am waiting for them to say if they believe I have a case and if they'll foot the bill for taking him to court if necessary. I should hear at the end of this week or early next.

If they turn me down, I'll have to sell it as I now have no confidence in it or the supplier so would be inclined to let him "make it road legal". Anyone interested in a nearly new 21 gear eMTB with just 8 miles on the clock? For use on private property of course!
 
  • Informative
Reactions: sjpt

Nealh

Esteemed Pedelecer
Aug 7, 2014
20,764
8,443
61
West Sx RH
The issue is it is illegal to ride a 1000w or 1500w rated motor even if it is reduced in power , simply reducing the speed limit to 15.5mph doesn't reduce the power. So unless there is software and the display can reduce the current load it isn't feasible.
Your controller rating must be approx. 40a if the motor is 1500w rated.

Have you had a word with trading standards ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjpt

TwoWheels1954

Finding my (electric) wheels
Feb 25, 2023
23
12
Thanks for your reply. I'm sceptical of his claims to be able to easily make it road legal. As I said, if that's the case, why didn't he do it before I collected it?
I haven't spoken to Trading Standards but I might. The reason being that I had a problem some years back, referred it to them and it was a complete waste of time. I might reconsider though.
 

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,289
Thanks for your reply. I'm sceptical of his claims to be able to easily make it road legal. As I said, if that's the case, why didn't he do it before I collected it?
I haven't spoken to Trading Standards but I might. The reason being that I had a problem some years back, referred it to them and it was a complete waste of time. I might reconsider though.
My impression of situation is he can't possibly make it legal. The motor can not be capable of 250w or greater continously. No matter what you supply it with or by it is in itself capable of well over that.
It's a bit like the 125cc law. Even if you restricted a 250 to under 11kw its still a 250..???
Motor must be labelled "250w".. But thousands flaunt the law, which is where your seller is coming from.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjpt

Benjahmin

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 10, 2014
2,579
1,739
70
West Wales
Regarding the motor. If it is marked '1500w', or similar, it is ilegal - end of. To be legal it has to be marked/stamped 250w.
It would be interesting to know how the seller intends to 'easily make it road legal.
Even if controller output current is restricted to 6.9A (250w @ 36v) the motor would still be ilegal as well as bloody useless as a direct drive at this current would probably produce more heat and noise than motion.
So, as you'd stated it was for road use, then bike is not fit for purpose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjpt and Zlatan

Bonzo Banana

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2019
778
449
Distortion, the Chinese don't ride the sort of pedelecs they mainly sell to us. They ride what are mopeds with circa 700 watt ratings with either no pedals or vestigial pedals that can only propel at very low speeds which they never use. They have also sent those to us but the takeup here has been very low. The same is true elsewhere in the orient where what are essentially mopeds are commonly seen with as many as whole families on board. Those are what pass as e-bikes in most of the orient, Japan being an exception to some extent due to their stronger law.

And in Africa and India** e-bikes scarcely exist. Once again you know next to nothing about the subject, seeming to think what you imagine is fact.

Why not stick to the subject, which is that there is no need to change the pedelec law when all needs are catered for with other laws.

While I understand you don't intend it, you are being very selfish. The pedelec law is a universal one to provide assistance for all cyclists needing it, which of course includes all the children who ride bicycles. In consequence many children in mainland Europe, especially the Netherlands, do ride pedelecs. So the safety aspects of the power and speed limits and how they are controlled by limiting within pedalling ability are important.

If you want an e-bike instead of a pedelec, just buy or create an L1e-A e-bike (Low Powered Moped) which is superior to any pedelec with throttle. Or, if like many, you want more speed and power to suit for your cycling, buy an L1e-B (S-class e-bike ).

Everyone is catered for, there is no need to mess with the excellent pedelec law. It is utterly pointless to rant as you are doing anyway, since the pedelec law will not change. It is indeed the only world standard in e-biking, with so many countries following it change is nigh on impossible now.

**Afrobarometer survey findings from 34 African countries show little progress in electrification. While experiences vary by country, on average access to a power grid improved by just 4 percentage points over the past decade. And even where connections to the grid exist, unreliable supply remains a major problem.

India currently reports 99.4% electrification, yet there are 304 million people who still lack access to electricity according to the recent draft of the National Energy Policy . In most countries, electrification means not only being connected to the grid but also providing homes and businesses sufficient electricity access to meet their daily needs. However, in India, the definition of electrification in rural areas, where most of the unelectrified population lives, has been detached from the actual supply of electricity to households.
.
In India and Africa often ebikes are the only motorised transport they can afford and there is a high level of kits from what I understand. A huge number of videos from India are how to fit ebike kits mainly simple brushed motors which are the cheapest option. However there is not much statistical information to back that up admittedly because these markets are under-developed.

There is certainly no manipulation on my side at all. At all times I'm being factual. Luckily China does have much better statistics. As already shown the average price of an ebike in China is $167. It goes without saying these are very simple ebikes using lead acid batteries. No fear of lithium-ion fires etc so they have their good points.

Statistics show that in China itself there are over 40 million ebikes sold a year and this is by far the biggest ebike market in the world for new complete ebikes.

I can't see anything mixing e-moped and ebike sales figures here;


However surely the price alone must indicate e-bikes anyway the average selling prices is far too low to allow for full e-mopeds surely. As for how they are used I have no idea, casual leisure, some commuting etc no data on that. However even here you see people who have spent thousands on a high end ebike only to sell it on the classifieds here with only a few hundred miles use. I don't think it would be fair to make assumptions of either high or low use. It's just people buying ebikes and their use will vary.

Again you have provided zero data to support your viewpoint where as I have provided good data clearly backing up my opinion. Surely at this point you have to provide data to support your opinion as you have provided nothing so far.

I think the EU ebike legislation is appalling and its much ignored around Europe and the UK as pretty much unworkable. It's anti-consumer and anti the environment. I'm certainly not angry or worked up about it though. It's just an opinion and easy to work around and is the legislation is pretty much ignored anyway. I was in Exeter on Monday, first time for years. For some reason there was constant police sirens and police cars driving about the city centre so something was going on. I used the park and ride to get into the city centre and couldn't help noticing the huge amount of gig economy ebike riders who had throttle based ebikes with direct drive hub motors. I saw at least 5 different ebike riders I think and the police were everywhere in full sight of these riders. The EU ebike legislation is just a complete farce and a joke quite honestly. I can't think of any other law so blatantly ignored by everyone including the authorities. Does it even need to be repealed or changed when everyone ignores it anyway?
 

Bonzo Banana

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2019
778
449
My impression of situation is he can't possibly make it legal. The motor can not be capable of 250w or greater continously. No matter what you supply it with or by it is in itself capable of well over that.
It's a bit like the 125cc law. Even if you restricted a 250 to under 11kw its still a 250..???
Motor must be labelled "250w".. But thousands flaunt the law, which is where your seller is coming from.
The ebike law is extremely poorly written. All ebike motor systems are capable of taking more power, the ebike law should have been completely focused on the controller which dictates how much power the motor gets but because its mid-drive focused where the controller is integrated into the main body of the motor assembly it makes zero sense when applied to hub motors where the controller is separate. The same direct drive hub motor can take from 200W power to 2000W because its very simple internally with no gearing and even geared hub motors can go from as low as maybe 150W to about 500W, i.e. a 24V hub motor can still be used with a 48V controller. The ebike law should be completely focused on the controller but unfortunately we have to put up with the moronic EU ebike legislation which makes little sense.
 

Nealh

Esteemed Pedelecer
Aug 7, 2014
20,764
8,443
61
West Sx RH
I to an extent agree , the regs for power control are all wrong. There is no regulation on the controller max current in use . So any controller can be used with a 250w rated motor, how long that motor lasts before failing is an open book.

If there was a max power controller rating we woul dall be riding around on bikes with 7a max rated controllers, instead most entry level 36v systems use 7a nominal controllers with a 14 or 15a max output.

A 48v powered bike woul have a max 5.2a controller.

What we have got is the complete opposite , so called motors rated/marked as 250w and then some pulling over 700 or 800w of power.
 
Last edited:

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,289
The ebike law is extremely poorly written. All ebike motor systems are capable of taking more power, the ebike law should have been completely focused on the controller which dictates how much power the motor gets but because its mid-drive focused where the controller is integrated into the main body of the motor assembly it makes zero sense when applied to hub motors where the controller is separate. The same direct drive hub motor can take from 200W power to 2000W because its very simple internally with no gearing and even geared hub motors can go from as low as maybe 150W to about 500W, i.e. a 24V hub motor can still be used with a 48V controller. The ebike law should be completely focused on the controller but unfortunately we have to put up with the moronic EU ebike legislation which makes little sense.
You make valid points but whatever law is there will always be those taking advantage.
The pedelec laws are not complicated at all. Folk make them so to justify a blatant disregard for following them. Your argument around where to legislate is pedantics. If controller were limited folk could easily muddy the water. What are police supposed to do, check controller is only capable of supplying 250w.(which would mean less power) My controller for very short bursts (when demand is there) will supply 600w or so. But average must be under 250w.(which it always is)
Your argument is much like saying learners should be limiter to 15bhp but from any size bike? That wouldn't work. Everybody would simply say "my bike produces 15bhp,"Police would have to prove otherwise for every bike. They, d need dynometers in back of every Police van.
As it is, if a 125 says so on engine block (which they do), on motorbike and on logbook its a 125.
If a pedelec says 250w on motor, and it has 15.5mph power limit, its a pedelec. What's the fuss.??
 

StuartsProjects

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 9, 2021
1,770
1,000
The current eBike\Pedalec rules are easily manageable for those that choose to be law abiding.

What is wrong with the system, as with many other regulations, is that there is no apparent interest in enforcing the regulations.

The UK in particular has become a society when observance of large number of regulations is seen as purely voluntary. This apparent behavour starts at the top, parties in lockdown for instance, and the masses follow the examples set.