February 21, 200818 yr There is a lot of talk about new laws on restricting bikes,and manufacturers seem to be trying to play safe,this happened years ago with 50cc mopeds and scooters restricted to 30mph,although sold restricted most can now be derestricted at first service to allow 40mph,considering these are proper motor vehicles needing insurance mot etc,i have never heard of anyone being charged with riding a derestricted motorbike (probably at least 75 percent are),which would also invalidate insurance.with an an assisted electric bike it would be almost impossible, to prove that the bike was travelling faster than allowed,due to the bike may be on a slight downhill or being pedalled.bikes will sell a lot better if they have an easilly removeable restrictor,and manufacturers will still be selling legal bikes.
February 21, 200818 yr Can I ask where the maximum 15mph figure came from, who decided it and for what reason?. Around 20mph would seem a more reasonable maximum speed to me. Martin
February 21, 200818 yr The European one is 25 kph of course, and in their utility cycling market slower speeds are the norm. Look at Dutch cyclists ambling about, and few are riding at anywhere near 15.5 mph / 25 kph, so that limit would seem generous to them. Here in Britain, our e-bike legal limit was originally 12 mph for years, later upped to 15 mph, presumably to get us into line with Europe as usual. So in neither 15 mph case was there any consideration given to cycling habits here. .
February 22, 200818 yr The "new regulations" on the way are an EU directive called EN15194 designed to to ensure that only safe pedelecs can be sold in the EU. This will of course include compliance with existing EU regulations along with appropriate standards of design and construction. As it will be against the law to sell bikes that do not comply, the directive will effectively outlaw the sale of bikes that only comply with the old UK law (Non-pedelecs). Similar EN standards already apply to conventional cycles, which is why cycles must be sold with a bell amongst other things. I don't know how much difference it will make to some Ebay sellers. but it will give trading standards a tool to determine whether a bike is OK or otherwise to sell, how effective this will be though given that some certification will undoubtedly be faked remains to be seen. EN15194 will only apply to products on sale after it's implementation date so existing bikes that are currently legal will remain OK to use. It will also only apply to complete bicycles so the sale of kits and components will be unaffected, it may well have an impact on shop fitted kits though. Edited February 22, 200818 yr by Ian
February 22, 200818 yr Author There may be some cheap non pedelec bikes, being cleared out before the new law then,these should still be ok to use,the new law should only affect sellers.
February 22, 200818 yr There may be some cheap non pedelec bikes, being cleared out before the new law then,these should still be ok to use,the new law should only affect sellers. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting Paul, EU bureaucracy usually being as slow as it is silly. It could well be that non-complying bikes manufactured or imported into the EU before the implementation date will be OK to sell after that date. This is what happened with the directive regarding toxic substances (ROHS). Either way the directive only affects the seller, once you have the bike you can use it without worry, as long as you're not too blatant with any illegal modifications.
February 24, 200818 yr Author If the new legislation is so far away why are the suppliers,eg ezee so keen to comply with it.is it trying to cover up battery problems.
February 24, 200818 yr If the new legislation is so far away why are the suppliers,eg ezee so keen to comply with it.is it trying to cover up battery problems. No. The regulations announcement was made long ago and is imminent, and the bike manufacturers can't rely on bureaucratic delays. Batteries are nothing to do with it, since Wisper are also complying but have now got their improved battery, and others are hard on their heels. .
February 24, 200818 yr The legislation is there it keep ebike's, bike's. There's always someone trying to get somewhere faster. If the ebike speed freaks Had their way and the hate bike clubs had their way, then all ebike riders would be wearing motorbike helmets and have a number plate attached. Im only buying a ebike for one reason ! It get me up the hills faster. After that I expect to use it just like a normal bike and use my legs.
February 24, 200818 yr The legislation is there it keep ebike's, bike's. There's always someone trying to get somewhere faster. If the ebike speed freaks Had their way and the hate bike clubs had their way, then all ebike riders would be wearing motorbike helmets and have a number plate attached. Im only buying a ebike for one reason ! It get me up the hills faster. After that I expect to use it just like a normal bike and use my legs. But if I can ride at 20mph+ on the flat or 30mph+ downhill without assistance, why shouldn't I be allowed to ride at 20mph uphill with assistance? Martin
February 24, 200818 yr Yes but that is unassisted. Thats the difference. Once you dont have to pedel to achieve that, then it fails to be a bike, but a motorbike instead. Which defeats the object of it all really. Its just a lightweight motorbike !
February 24, 200818 yr Yes but that is unassisted. Thats the difference. Once you dont have to pedel to achieve that, then it fails to be a bike, but a motorbike instead. Which defeats the object of it all really. Its just a lightweight motorbike ! I agree they should remain as proper bikes, but as far as I know the new laws will make bikes 'pedelec only' and they will be limited to 15.5mph. So wouldn't it make more sense for them to be 'pedelec only', limited to 20mph? Martin
February 24, 200818 yr I've just ordered a pedelec, but no I dont agree. Some people who cannot pedel fully due to health reasons would miss out on the benefits of cycling, which would be a shame. I just feel the restriction is fine ! Again if people want speed then pedel harder or get a motorbike. You carnt have you cake and eat it ( as the saying goes).
February 24, 200818 yr So who came up with the 15.5mph figure? I doubt they have done much cycling. Martin
February 24, 200818 yr Dont know, dont care. You should read Fleccs review of the Agattu. Without reading it directly I feel that it is the average speed that matters most in a trip/route. You can do 60mph down a road and then to 2mph up a steep hill. An ebike should keep your speed as constant as possible, despite the terrain I suppose. I feel that more important than anything else.
February 24, 200818 yr I will be surprised if after you have ridden your new bike for a while, you keep the original 22 tooth rear sprocket! Martin
February 24, 200818 yr I know nothing about bikes so I will do very little to the bike unless it needs restoring to its orginal state.
February 24, 200818 yr So who came up with the 15.5mph figure? I doubt they have done much cycling. Martin It exceeded the speeds their cyclists were doing, so was ample in the view of the EU legislators: Link .
February 24, 200818 yr It exceeded the speeds their cyclists were doing, so was ample in the view of the EU legislators: Link . Well they were wrong! Martin
February 24, 200818 yr In Germany they ride their bikes on the sidewalk, where 15 mph is fast with people walking all over the place. In Denmark we have beautiful wide cycle paths along most main roads, but with very sparse cycle traffic. We have two sort of mopeds, 30 km/h 19mph requring insurance, helmet, recently a special license plate, and a moped driver license if you're between 16 and 18 years old. These are allowed to drive the same places as cycles, except in some recreational areas. The other type, 45 km/h 28mph (this being the lowest speed EU allows the national governments to setfor these, other countries allow up to 80km/h), requires car or motorbike license, license plate, insurance and MOT when changing owner. The 45 scooters MUST drive on the road everywhere, and if you use the empty cycle path along a main road with heavy traffic, instead of risking your life and p****** the motorists your blocking off, you pay a considerable fine if cought by the police. All this leads to that this speed segment is quite complicated and regulated.
February 24, 200818 yr Doesn't this show what a daft idea European wide laws are. With such different culture and behaviour in different EU countries, how can they work? Martin
February 24, 200818 yr Well they were wrong! Martin Not at the time of that original legislation Martin, since it was EU only then, without pan-European force, and as said, their speeds were commonly much lower than ours, and still are. In fact many of their low countries legislators would have been cyclists, far more than ours, that's for certain. It was long after, 2002 I think, when the order for enforcement in all EU countries came into force from the start of November of that year. So as said, the habits of British cyclists were never in the legislative frame when the speed was chosen. Remember that some of those countries have had shared facilities for pedestrians and cyclists for very many years, so consideration would have been given to that as well. In contrast, in the USA where space isn't so much a problem and shared cycling facilities were virtually non existent until quite recently, speed limits are commonly around 20 mph, varying by locations. As ever, if instead of arguing with Europe at every opportunity, we'd joined early and got on with making it work from the beginning, we'd have had a proper say in this matter and in many others, instead of being stuck with their prior decisions. So the fault is entirely ours and we have only ourselves to blame. .
February 24, 200818 yr As ever, if instead of arguing with Europe at every opportunity, we'd joined early and got on with making it work from the beginning, we'd have had a proper say in this matter and in many others, instead of being stuck with their prior decisions. So the fault is entirely ours and we have only ourselves to blame. . Yes, we should decide whether we are in the EU or out(I'd be out), instead of fannying about sitting on the fence. Martin
February 24, 200818 yr Yes, we should decide whether we are in the EU or out(I'd be out), instead of fannying about sitting on the fence. Martin Absolutely right Martin, we just get the worst of all worlds with our yes/no behaviours over the years. Either fully in or fully out would be better than the silliness of constantly demanding renegotiation of one thing or another. It's a strange issue this, with those for and those against the European membership being in so much agreement on the need for decisiveness. .
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.