New Legal Speed Limit: What should it be?

[flecc]

The throttle ‘dilemma’
Harmonisation with EU law has had an important effect on electric bikes with ‘twist and go’ throttles that can take the bike to full speed without any pedalling at all.

From January 1 2016, the only throttles legal within the UK’s EAPC legislation are those that assist the rider without pedalling up to a maximum speed of 6 km/h (3.7 mph) – ie starting assistance only.

If the rider is rolling – but not pedalling – faster than 6km/h, the throttle cuts off. If the cyclist pedals at the same time then the throttle can still assist up to the general limit of 15.5mph.

If you bought an ebike with a full-speed throttle before January 1 2016, don’t panic: those sold prior to this date are still considered as EAPC and do not require a registration or taxed. Practically, you could still buy one a ‘twist and go’ and not be fined, but it would have to have been produced or imported before January 1.

Yes, all that has been posted in here at the time of those law changes, 6th April 2015.

In fact the DfT have tried to make throttles legal here, here's the extract from their legal advice:

Power assistance - "Twist and Go"

Because of the particular benefits for elderly and disabled users, pedal cyclesproviding electrical assistance without use of the pedals - usually called "Twist and Goes" - are included in the above GB classification provided they are capable of pedal operation
and comply with the above restrictions on maximum motor power and assistance cut -off speed.

However, under European law new "Twist and Go" vehicles will, from January 2016, have to meet a range of technical requirements before they can be used on roads. This will normally be established by "type approval" at the manufacturing stage but importers and individuals will be able to seek an individual approval for vehicles that have not been type approved.

Unfortunately the EU wouldn't co-operate in providing any way of individual or mass type approval as EAPCs.
.

 

[Tim Davies]

Not true for many of us Tim, including this ex motorcyclist, as I posted earlier it's not the actual speed that's the issue. It's what will come with it:

See this post

Given the existing motor vehicle classes, there is no way we'll get higher assist speed without more very unwelcome bureacracy.
.

I take your point on what comes with it, I sometimes ware a helmet when I'm on roads that I'm unsure of or that are very busy ( is around ferry terminals busy towns/ city's but if weather is hot it's actually distracting so I want to be able to choose to use it as and when I deem it necessary and not when someone tells me to. The next would be number plates and all that comes with it. I already have 3rd party insurance as I feel it's the right thing to do as if I was to hit someone when I was on my bike regardless of fault then at least we'd both be covered.

 

[flecc]

In your post at 10.10am you stated, “You are permitted 17 mph assisted legally.” This is simple incorrect, goes against current UK e-bike legislation (NI excepted) and in itself is creating confusion to this forums members. The law is what it is and yes please feel free to offer advice, but if you are advising someone to bend to rules and use the alleged 10% leeway to their advantage, at a bare minimum put a Caveat to that effect.

Techically correct, but I find your position on this utterly ridiculous and very unhelpful. We all know the letter of this law, it appears everywhere in e-biking even to the extent that those who haven't bought yet are asking in here what to is best to buy for derestricting. Having given good practical advice, your intervention now has a member saying "who knows what the law is", showing the confusion you caused.

Let me try to take you into the real world. Following government advice to local authorities, my London Borough of Croydon has introduced a borough wide 20 mph speed limit on most roads, only some through routes escaping. Our roads are now plastered with speed limit and repeater signs.

But immediately after that announcement the Metropolitan Police issued a statement that they wouldn't be enforcing it, making it no more than a token. I understand that this is the widespread view of police forces nationally and local authorities are now being told to take over enforcement. Some hope, they can't afford to even empty bins any more.

In a world where the police openly refuse to enforce a legal 20 mph limit on all vehicles, what makes you think they will concern themselves with a DfT supported 1.5 mph tolerance on a limit that's far below 20 mph?

For you to quote the letter of the law and give credence to such a possibility is frankly ridiculous. That's for law school, not for the real world, especially this UK one where almost all e-bikes were known to be very illegally on the road from 10th November 2003 to 6th April 2015 with no action taken. And that includes all the e-bikes that UK police forces were operating during that 12 years!
.

 

[soundwave]

it is the same in new york but there are way more ebikes over there and as here the police dont do anything to enforce the 19,9mph speed limit.

he has a bafang hd with a 60a mod

 

[Gubbins]

Techically correct, but I find your position on this utterly ridiculous and very unhelpful. We all know the letter of this law, it appears everywhere in e-biking even to the extent that those who haven't bought yet are asking in here what to is best to buy for derestricting. Having given good practical advice, your intervention now has a member saying "who knows what the law is", showing the confusion you caused.

Let me try to take you into the real world. Following government advice to local authorities, my London Borough of Croydon has introduced a borough wide 20 mph speed limit on most roads, only some through routes escaping. Our roads are now plastered with speed limit and repeater signs.

But immediately after that announcement the Metropolitan Police issued a statement that they wouldn't be enforcing it, making it no more than a token. I understand that this is the widespread view of police forces nationally and local authorities are now being told to take over enforcement. Some hope, they can't afford to even empty bins any more.

In a world where the police openly refuse to enforce a legal 20 mph limit on all vehicles, what makes you think they will concern themselves with a DfT supported 2 mph tolerance on a limit that's far below 20 mph?

For you to quote the letter of the law and give credence to such a possibility is frankly ridiculous. That's for law school, not for the real world, especially this UK one where almost all e-bikes were known to be very illegally on the road from 10th November 2003 to 6th April 2015 with no action taken. And that includes all the e-bikes that UK police forces were operating during that 12 years!
.

Just to be argumentative.... and only a small point.. the councils have to pay to empty bins.. money they don't have going out, but if they were able to levy speeding fines that would be money comming in... so perhaps they might view this activity more enthusiasticly.

 

[Nefarious]

It's not a speed limit, is it? It's an assist threshold

 

[Gubbins]

It's not a speed limit, is it? It's an assist threshold

Was thinking that but it's still an assisted speed limit.

 

[flecc]

Just to be argumentative.... and only a small point.. the councils have to pay to empty bins.. money they don't have going out, but if they were able to levy speeding fines that would be money comming in... so perhaps they might view this activity more enthusiasticly.

Theres no way they will take on this responsibility and some have already made that clear. And here's a real world example of how hard pressed local authorities are.

My council no longer enforces even the most blatant parking infringements, despite the possible income from that. That even includes those with photos sent to them showing clear number plates of cars parked fully on pavements and blocking entrances, and even one where an ambulance was prevented by illegal car parking from reaching a stretcher patient. They just don't have the staff and vehicles any more.
.

 

[flecc]

It's not a speed limit, is it? It's an assist threshold

The DfT class it as a speed limit.
.

 

[Nefarious]

The DfT class it as a speed limit.
.

Even though we can travel much faster unassisted?! That's completely illogical

 

[flecc]

Even though we can travel much faster unassisted?! That's completely illogical

It's not just a matter of logic, the existence of the motorcycling classes ties their hands. For example:

The L1e-A (low powered moped) class is for bicycles with up to 1000 watts rating but still limited to 15.5 mph. They have to be registered, number plated, VED'd and insured and riders have to have a driving licence and wear m/c approved helmets. I think CBT applies too.

Obviously that makes a faster powered speed for untested unlicenced, uninsured, unprotected and untraceable riders impossible.
.

 

[soundwave]

i wonder if anyone bar me has dongle and gone out just to get the police to chase them.

cos i have tried loads of times even blasting past there main hq and there just not interested.

 

[Capt Sisko]

Techically correct, but I find your position on this utterly ridiculous and very unhelpful. We all know the letter of this law, it appears everywhere in e-biking even to the extent that those who haven't bought yet are asking in here what to is best to buy for derestricting. Having given good practical advice, your intervention now has a member saying "who knows what the law is", showing the confusion you caused.

Let me try to take you into the real world. Following government advice to local authorities, my London Borough of Croydon has introduced a borough wide 20 mph speed limit on most roads, only some through routes escaping. Our roads are now plastered with speed limit and repeater signs.

But immediately after that announcement the Metropolitan Police issued a statement that they wouldn't be enforcing it, making it no more than a token. I understand that this is the widespread view of police forces nationally and local authorities are now being told to take over enforcement. Some hope, they can't afford to even empty bins any more.

In a world where the police openly refuse to enforce a legal 20 mph limit on all vehicles, what makes you think they will concern themselves with a DfT supported 2 mph tolerance on a limit that's far below 20 mph?

For you to quote the letter of the law and give credence to such a possibility is frankly ridiculous. That's for law school, not for the real world, especially this UK one where almost all e-bikes were known to be very illegally on the road from 10th November 2003 to 6th April 2015 with no action taken. And that includes all the e-bikes that UK police forces were operating during that 12 years!
.

It does not matter whether the Police chose to enforce the law or not, it is the law and you, me, everyone has a moral duty to abide by the law, like it or not. No, we can’t always do that and I’m no saint, but to justify breaking the law just because of a unofical set of guidelines, a previous lenient policy or the fact the Police lack the recourses to enforce it is a very weak argument indeed.

 

[Gubbins]

It does not matter whether the Police chose to enforce the law or not, it is the law and you, me, everyone has a moral duty to abide by the law, like it or not. No, we can’t always do that and I’m no saint, but to justify breaking the law just because of a unofical set of guidelines, a previous lenient policy or the fact the Police lack the recourses to enforce it is a very weak argument indeed.

I would say that the police being unlikely to bother is a strong argument for breaking the law. Isn't that what the police do? Provide a deterrent, or not as the case may be.

 

[Nefarious]

I'm not arguing about what the authorities can or can't do with the law relative to other laws. I'm just saying that an assist threshold is not, logically, a speed limit, as you can legally go faster under your own steam

 

[Charliefox]

The problem is the difference between riding on the roads and on cycle paths. At the moment, we can use both. 15 mph on the road is probably too slow, but 20 mph on a cycle path is definitely too fast. Not for the cyclists. I'm thinking about people with dogs on long leads and with kids not looking where they're going, let alone all the ones tacking towards you while their heads are looking at their phones.

Couldn't agree more. I prefer slower speeds because my battery lasts longer both for charging and lifespan. Can still fly down the hills though.

 

[flecc]

It does not matter whether the Police chose to enforce the law or not, it is the law and you, me, everyone has a moral duty to abide by the law, like it or not. No, we can’t always do that and I’m no saint, but to justify breaking the law just because of a unofical set of guidelines, a previous lenient policy or the fact the Police lack the recourses to enforce it is a very weak argument indeed.

Best tell the DfT then, they made the tolerance ruling. Being from the DfT who create the law in this area means it is not an unofficial guideline, it's as official as a guideline can ever get.
.

 

[mags2]

I feel a little more is needed but 20 could be a bit much around people to be honest. I do feel the current limit is just below what is ideal for most.

Maybe there could be new rules that allow higher speeds on roads but keep the current limit on cycle paths and near people.

 

[flecc]

Maybe there could be new rules that allow higher speeds on roads but keep the current limit on cycle paths and near people.

But those higher speeds on roads cannot happen without bureaucracy you wouldn't welcome.

See this post

And this post

Is all that hassle really what you want?
.

 

[TZC]

It does not matter whether the Police chose to enforce the law or not, it is the law and you, me, everyone has a moral duty to abide by the law, like it or not. No, we can’t always do that and I’m no saint, but to justify breaking the law just because of a unofical set of guidelines, a previous lenient policy or the fact the Police lack the recourses to enforce it is a very weak argument indeed.

I like to use something before I accept law, my brain. A law isn't something ordained by god to you the individual. It's something some other blokes came up with while in a position of power.
Not to say that going fast on an ebike is a good idea, I just thought I'd mention that


EDIT: I should have mentioned since it was the trigering of this post that morality and law are seperate,
I would think that I know what's moral but that doesn't extend to following law. I dunno. wish I hadn't bothered posting already lol