News: ‘Twist and go’ type approval guidance emerges

[Pedelecs]

The Bicycle Association (‘BAGB’, which merged with BEBA 3 years ago) and the DfT have recently released guidance on type approval for twist and go electric bikes, in line with the new requirements from January 2016.

(excerpt)
BAGB have also shared with Pedelecs the guidance provided to its manufacturer and retailer members in light of confusion as to whether a procedure is in place to type approve twist and gos. They say: “It has been argued that it is legal to sell new electric bicycles with ‘twist and go’ throttles until the 1st January 2018 without type approval. This is incorrect. Type approval is required now for the legal sale of new electric bicycles fitted with a ‘twist and go’ throttle.

“There are several possible routes to type approval for these “twist and go” electric bicycles, as set out in UK Statutory Instrument 2015-474. The two main options are:

• The Motorcycle Single Vehicle Approval (MSVA)
• European Whole Vehicle Type Approval (ECWVTA)

Full story: http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/news/twist-go-type-approval-guidance-emerges/

 

[(NoLongerRegistered#15675)]

Blast...another rule to ignore.

 

[flecc]

A repeat of this utterly contemptible dishonesty which should be challenged.

The authorities and the Bicycle Association are well aware that there is no present MSVA path for the approval of a twist and go pedelec/EAPC.

Any owner trying to get a pedelec through this paths will find it nearly impossible without drastic alterations to the bike, Furthermore, if successful it will be classified as a form of motorcycle, requiring registration, number plate, third party insurance and compulsory approved motorcycle crash helmet.

In other words it will not continue to be considered as an EAPC as the DfT promised.

For that we have to wait until at least January 2018 for a path to twist and go approval as an EAPC.

If what they are saying was true, there would be no need for the 2018 change that the DfT have indicated.
.

 

[craiggor]

A repeat of this utterly contemptible dishonesty which should be challenged.

The authorities and the Bicycle Association are well aware that there is no present MSVA path for the approval of a twist and go pedelec/EAPC.

Any owner trying to get a pedelec through this paths will find it nearly impossible without drastic alterations to the bike, Furthermore, if successful it will be classified as a form of motorcycle, requiring registration, number plate, third party insurance and compulsory approved motorcycle crash helmet.

In other words it will not be continue to be considered as an EAPC as the DfT promised.

For that we have to wait until at least January 2018 for a path to twist and go approval as an EAPC.

If what they are saying was true, there would be no need for the 2018 change that the DfT have indicated.
.

The last paragraph of the pedelecs link says,if 250w it's still a bicycle.Does that mean they need MSVA, no registration,tax,insurance,M.O.T. and licence ? Anything over 250w needs registering.

 

[flecc]

The last paragraph of the pedelecs link says,if 250w it's still a bicycle.Does that mean they need MSVA, no registration,tax,insurance,M.O.T. and licence ? Anything over 250w needs registering.

Yes they need MSVA. This is the extract that counts:

“There are several possible routes to type approval for these “twist and go” electric bicycles, as set out in UK Statutory Instrument 2015-474. The two main options are:

• The Motorcycle Single Vehicle Approval (MSVA)
• European Whole Vehicle Type Approval (ECWVTA)

European whole vehicle type approval is impractically expensive to obtain for most cycle suppliers (it is intended for larger-scale motorbike and car industries, with sufficient control of their supply chains to be able to document ‘conformity of production’), but if it were sought, any in-force requirements from 168/2013 and associated regulations would need to be satisfied.


“But for most electric bicycle suppliers, the realistic current route to type approval is the MSVA test, which does not yet include those requirements. And so long as a “twist and go” electric bicycle passes the MSVA (currently, by satisfying the MSVA test requirements for a ‘low powered moped’) it is regarded as type approved for the UK, despite the fact that the current MSVA is not yet aligned with the EU requirements, or the vehicle classes, set out via EU Regulation 168/2013.”

The words I've highlighted in bold illustrate what I've posted above. Low Powered Mopeds are subject to all the conditions for motorcycles as the law stands now.

We need a clear statement of exemption for twist and go bikes, not these woolly references.
.

 

[craiggor]

Yes they need MSVA. This is the extract that counts:

“There are several possible routes to type approval for these “twist and go” electric bicycles, as set out in UK Statutory Instrument 2015-474. The two main options are:

• The Motorcycle Single Vehicle Approval (MSVA)
• European Whole Vehicle Type Approval (ECWVTA)

European whole vehicle type approval is impractically expensive to obtain for most cycle suppliers (it is intended for larger-scale motorbike and car industries, with sufficient control of their supply chains to be able to document ‘conformity of production’), but if it were sought, any in-force requirements from 168/2013 and associated regulations would need to be satisfied.


“But for most electric bicycle suppliers, the realistic current route to type approval is the MSVA test, which does not yet include those requirements. And so long as a “twist and go” electric bicycle passes the MSVA (currently, by satisfying the MSVA test requirements for a ‘low powered moped’) it is regarded as type approved for the UK, despite the fact that the current MSVA is not yet aligned with the EU requirements, or the vehicle classes, set out via EU Regulation 168/2013.”

The words I've highlighted in bold illustrate what I've posted above. Low Powered Mopeds are subject to all the conditions for motorcycles as the law stands now.

We need a clear statement of exemption for twist and go bikes, not these woolly references.
.

Yes,but will/can the MSVA requirements be changed ? Wasn't there some thing about that changing in September this year,in another link somewhere ?

 

[Pedelecs]

The BAGB quotes in the article are taken from a document sent to me by them but also uploaded in full here:
http://www.bicycleassociation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2016-04-11-TG-EAPC-BA-Technical-Note-v5.pdf

Changes to the MSVA are mentioned on Q2:

Will there be a new ‘Twist &Go EAPC’ test in 2018 which will make it easier for throttle electric bicycles to be type approved?

The short answer is no – but there should be a revised MSVA.

The MSVA is due to be revised/replaced to fall into line with the EU rules deriving from Regulation 168/2013. We are told that the DfT are prioritising updating the UK’s type approval regulations for larger vehicles (cars etc.) to bring them in line with 168/2013, and also the related matter of tightening up emissions regulations following the diesel emissions scandal. But once these are in place, the MSVA test is in line to be revised, likely sometime in 2017 (and all of the Delegated Implementing Regulations of 168/2013 should also have been finalised by then). The outcome should be a test which reflects the 168/2013 categories and its requirements; most electric bicycles will fall into L1e-A (powered cycles), which covers cycles with motors rated up to 1 kW, but still with a 25 km/h max assist speed. This revised MSVA will also have to take account of the additional requirements that come in for the L1e-A class on 1st Jan 2018. For some of them (e.g. ‘vehicle structural integrity’) it is likely that reference can simply be made to existing cycle standards, perhaps with higher loadings for fatigue testing in certain areas. Cycles under 35 kg are also exempted from some requirements.

Once the Delegated Regulations are finalised, and the DfT turn their attention to the MSVA, we hope for more clarity (and discussion) about how exactly it will all be implemented into UK law.

The DfT have indicated that they are keen to find a way to make T&G EAPC type approval possible and practical, within their legal constraints, in line with their previous commitments, although how exactly this will be achieved is far from clear at this stage. The BA will assist with this however possible.
(ends)
--
I also tried to initiate a discussion with the VCA about the 'natural fit' of the moped type approval category and an e-bike some time back, my questions were picked up by the DfT and the response they've given me so far is included in the article.

 

[shemozzle999]

Hi Helen,

Thank you for trying to obtain the answers to these problems.

I see in the document that the BAGB are persisting with redefining the powered cycle vehicle class of 168/2013 and is constantly changing it, even their hazy pixelated 1st newsletter definitions already seem to be out of date ,

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/peter-eland-produces-bicycle-association-s-first-newsletter/018602

whereas the priority should have been redefining exemption clause 2(h) to include throttles and these problems would have been eliminated and standard EN15194 would have prevailed.

The Government, to their credit, have taken this on board. I hope any discussions on the matter will be open and transparent to consumers as they are also an interested party.

Has anyone asked the Commission to explain what justification they can produce to exclude the elderly and disadvantaged EU citizen's treaty backed rights to fully enjoy the same to use of an EAPC/EPAC as the healthy and young citizens of the EU. I can find no reference in the past or present EU documents to indicate a test ever been made based on compliance with these treaties.

With the establishment of Class L1e-A new vehicles will now be monitored and should evidence arise that throttles cause a safety problem then exemption 2(h) can be justly changed back to exclude them.

 

[anotherkiwi]

I feel your pain, I am glad that I am in the EU - no throttles.

Did that help?

 

[Wisper Bikes]

This still makes my blood boil!

If the BA had not been so closely affiliated with the the MCIA we would have closed this point three years ago during a meeting in London with the DfT. With the help from several independent surveys, one taken on this forum and taking into account the needs of the elderly and disadvantaged, Mark Loveridge and I argued that the use of a throttle would make make cycling more inclusive. The DfT agreed with us and were happy at that point to find a way of making the inclusion of a throttle straight forward. The BA (read MCIA) argued that they would only agree if the bikes were type approved, the DfT said they would find a way of owners and importers achieving this with as little fuss as possible. In retrospect that was the moment to stand firm.

In my opinion there is absolutely no reason to exclude a full working throttle from an AEPC... apart from making the MCIA feel a little more comfortable about their problems in the failing moped market.

Most companies that have a say over the way their bikes are built have kept the throttle as an assistance regulator. As long as there is 1 gramme of pressure driving the rear wheel through the drive train and the pedals turning forward, the throttle becomes a very accurate and sophisticated way of letting the bike know how exactly how much assistance is required by the rider. I hope this helps those who find riding a pedal cycle tricky. Currently it's the best we can offer within the rules.

All the best

David

 

[Artstu]

I feel your pain, I am glad that I am in the EU - no throttles.

Did that help?

Well it was easy for me to understand that's for sure. Those other posts get very complicated.

 

[HelenJ]

I am keen for this to continue to be an open debate (what this forum is all about after all) and I contacted the VCA and DfT for clarification and because I was concerned that a consultation was under way to set penalties for non-compliance while confusion on how to be compliant is rife. I did also want to reassure purchasers that compliance doesn’t lie with them (which the DfT have clarified, their statement is in the article, although I haven’t yet had a reply on home builds).

So I’m also keen to pass back on to BAGB and DfT collective responses - particularly from the consumer side - and particularly with the knowledgeable members we have on here, to see if anything can be done here to allow those that need a throttle to continue to cycle without problem.

Thanks for your thoughts so far, and I apologise as I know this has been discussed before and I'm probably making some of you repeat yourselves, but is there any more to say on the below..

Is there any speedy or easy way to amend 2(h) to put twist and gos outside of type approval scope since it’s EU law? Similarly type approval requirements (L1e-A) are EU level law, so a pared down version with only automatic lighting may not be (an easy) possibility either?

Enforcement here in the UK should be. So perhaps no penalties until we see where we’re at when MSVA revision happens? Whilst that’s not yet been set as it’s under discussion, it is the last step in the chain, so are there any realistic options before that stage is reached?

As David has said in theory there only needs to be a small amount of pressure turning the pedals forward to comply with 2(h), which cropped up in a discussion I’ve had elsewhere and also seen discussed on the forum (along the lines of ‘is it possible for riders to continue to turn the pedals without force to continue power application’). However that doesn’t resolve the problem for all.. see below.

Someone I spoke to at the VCA said the exclusion (type approval) for 'vehicles intended for physically handicapped use' is an area they now take a much harder line on, and considered something of a ‘loophole’ but the truth is the throttle fits that category for so many people, those with ME, those with limited use of their legs, or only one leg and can’t carry over a pedal rotation if a system is used whereby the motor turns the pedals, even gently. Those with arthritic joints that can lock up at times when they need a throttle to deliver power but being able to pedal at other times provides crucial exercise.

Any comments I will pass them on to DfT/BAGB.

 

[trex]

I thought that this paragraph is quite clear:

In a response to Pedelecs, the DfT clarified: “The responsibility for obtaining type approval (or single approval) rests squarely with the manufacturer or retailer. The user is not committing an offence by riding or purchasing a non-approved bike.”

I am sure that the suppliers are capable of looking after themselves.

 

[HelenJ]

Fair enough.

 

[flecc]

Is there any speedy or easy way to amend 2(h) to put twist and gos outside of type approval scope since it’s EU law?

Similarly type approval requirements (L1e-A) are EU level law, so a pared down version with only automatic lighting may not be (an easy) possibility either?

Since mainland Europe has lived without throttles for at least 13 years, pedelecers there are not demanding them. To me that makes it highly unlikely that the EU will even consider such a change, despite the way it disadvantages those with limited physical abilities. So I don't think it worth pursuing this avenue.

Enforcement here in the UK should be. So perhaps no penalties until we see where we’re at when MSVA revision happens?

I'm sure this is the avenue to pursue, since nation states of the EU have considerable flexibility where usage is concerned.

Take France for example. There one can drive certain 45 kph (almost 30 mph) light cars, known as quadricycles, without a driving licence, that including youngsters. Here's the regulation loophole:

European legislation on driving and licence conditions is based on directive 91/439, which defines driving licence requirements for different categories of motor vehicles, from two-wheelers upwards.
This directive defines a licence B1 for heavy motorised quadricycles, but does not include any particular provision for light motorised quadricycles. Each European country is therefore free to allow - or not - driving without a licence.

I'm sure a close study might expose ways of having similar flexibility with pedelecs that have some motor vehicle features like a throttle.

Another approach is to insist that a throttle on a pedelec is in truth a power constraint and not a throttle in the normal sense. The reasoning is that since the power on a pedelec is limited to a maximum continous 250 watts rating, the so called throttle is really only a power reducer. It therefore has a similar status to a power safety cutout, similar to that on many motorcycles.
.

 

[flecc]

I thought that this paragraph is quite clear:

In a response to Pedelecs, the DfT clarified: “The responsibility for obtaining type approval (or single approval) rests squarely with the manufacturer or retailer. The user is not committing an offence by riding or purchasing a non-approved bike.”

I am sure that the suppliers are capable of looking after themselves.

But this excludes self builds where the SVA responsibility is that of the owner, so still unsatisfactory.

First, this DfT statement needs to be restated as applying to all consumer use of e-bikes fitting the EU specification but with a throttle.

Second, it should be issued as an instruction to all police forces as a directive not to prosecute, similar to the way that was done by the DfT in 2013 with regard to 250 watts usage when the law stated 200 watts limit.

With those two simple things done we can shut up.
.
.

 

[trex]

First, this DfT statement needs to be restated as applying to all consumer use of e-bikes fitting the EU specification but with a throttle.

.

would they though?

that would be a backdoor for anyone buying a manufactured bike with a socket for a thumb throttle to add it in themselves.

 

[craiggor]

Why do the EU/ dft think throttles are bad ? Are they seen as dangerous ? Is there any accident statistics ?

Sent from my D101 using Tapatalk

 

[flecc]

Why do the EU/ dft think throttles are bad ? Are they seen as dangerous ? Is there any accident statistics ?

Sent from my D101 using Tapatalk

Two reasons. First the EU type approval exemption for pedelecs excludes the use of throttles. Second the motorcycle trade interests oppose them, since they want to protect their moped sales and see pedelecs as a threat.
.

 

[trex]

I think they like raising some additional income for the VCA.