TONIGHT 9pm: - E-Bikes: The Battle for Our Streets - Panorama

[portals]

It isn't fraudulent. When they stamp it 250w, it means that it can handle 250w. It must be able to run at 250w at optimum rpm indefinitely without over-heating. It complies with that. There is no requirement for how much extra power it can handle.

You still seem to have the idea in your head that the law limits the output power somehow. It doesn't. They tell you want the rating must be and how to test it. If it passes the test, it's compliant.

By that logic why is a 1500W hub illegal, it would run forever at 250W continuous at optimum rpm indefinitely without over-heating?

And no requirement for how much extra power it can handle so sticker granted?

So they don't care about peak current only continuous, even if it can peak at 1800W because
'there is no requirement for how much extra power it can handle?

Eh?

 

[Woosh]

By that logic why is a 1500W hub illegal, it would run forever at 250W continuous at optimum rpm indefinitely without over-heating?

And no requirement for how much extra power it can handle so sticker granted?

So they don't care about peak current only continuous, even if it can peak at 1800W because
'there is no requirement for how much extra power it can handle?

Eh?

It is illegal because the manufacturer wants to sell it as high speed motor.
Typically, Chinese manufacturers rate their motor based on the average speed the motor will deliver for a typical user. If the motor is capable of averaging 30mph, they would call it 1500W.
For road legal motors, manufacturers aim at 18mph capable. That leaves enough margin for practical deployment.
Besides this practical power rating, motors intended for road legal bikes need appropriate labelling. The 250W label is to fulfil this requirement.

 

[lenny]

Bicycle Association formally complains to BBC over Adrian Chiles’ e-bike Panorama “misrepresentation”, claiming episode “unjustifiably damaged” legal e-bike industry
The cycle industry organisation said the programme conflated e-bikes with “illegal e-motorbikes”, lacked balance, and “failed to properly inform the public”
"Elsewhere in the complaint, Chiles’ claim in the episode that the laws and regulations around e-bikes are “unclear or insufficient” was branded “factually incorrect”.

“The law is completely clear about what is or is not a road legal e-bike (EAPC),” the association said. “Any electrically powered two-wheeler that is not a road legal e-bike (EAPC), or a properly type approved and registered e-moped/e-motorbike, is an illegal e-motorbike."

Bicycle Association formally complains to BBC over Adrian Chiles’ e-bike Panorama “misrepresentation”, claiming episode “unjustifiably damaged” legal e-bike industry

The cycle industry organisation said the programme conflated e-bikes with “illegal e-motorbikes”, lacked balance, and “failed to properly inform the public”

road.cc

 

[lenny]

Independent cycle traders 'hate the division' that BBC Panorama e-bike documentary 'tried to sow'
""I think the programme probably achieved what it wanted to," he said. "Nearly everyone watching it, either for or against e-bikes, was angry by the time the opening credits finished. There were multiple shots of e-motorbikes, and a lot fewer of e-bikes."

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/independent-cycle-traders-hate-the-division-that-bbc-panorama-e-bike-documentary-tried-to-sow

 

[matthewslack]

It isn't fraudulent. When they stamp it 250w, it means that it can handle 250w. It must be able to run at 250w at optimum rpm indefinitely without over-heating. It complies with that. There is no requirement for how much extra power it can handle.

You still seem to have the idea in your head that the law limits the output power somehow. It doesn't. They tell you want the rating must be and how to test it. If it passes the test, it's compliant.

What would be interesting to see tested in court (has it ever been? I'm too new to all this to know the history) a motor capable of indefinitely operating at say 500W without overheating, but 'rated' at 250W.

Such a motor passes the measurement test, because the test is designed to assess minimum not maximum continuous power.

Higher courts, if troubled with the issue, would need to rule on the intent of the legislation, which I suspect would come down in a rather more limited way than current practice.

Opponents have a valid point as long as motors well beyond 250W continuous capability are allowed, and it remains trivial via either settings or dongles to bypass the assistance speed limit.

 

[lenny]

Deconstructed: The BBC’s Panorama e-bike segment and its many flaws

https://www.cyclingelectric.com/in-depth/deconstructed-the-bbcs-panorama-e-bike-segment-and-its-many-flaws

 

[Peter.Bridge]

What would be interesting to see tested in court (has it ever been? I'm too new to all this to know the history) a motor capable of indefinitely operating at say 500W without overheating, but 'rated' at 250W.

Such a motor passes the measurement test, because the test is designed to assess minimum not maximum continuous power.

Higher courts, if troubled with the issue, would need to rule on the intent of the legislation, which I suspect would come down in a rather more limited way than current practice.

Opponents have a valid point as long as motors well beyond 250W continuous capability are allowed, and it remains trivial via either settings or dongles to bypass the assistance speed limit.

Basically, at very low speeds, no hub motor will be able to output 250 W because it is operating in an extremely inefficient fashion so would certainly not be able to output 250 w continuously - e.g. a 48V AKM 128 with a 48V 20 amp controller (nominally rated at 800W) going up a 25% hill with 50w of human power can only manage 189 w (and I imagine would overheat very quickly) despite it being rated as 800w by the manufacturer

e.g.

Futility of Motor Power Ratings

"There's no such thing as a rated watt!" Read here for why we don't advertise a simple power rating for the motors we sell. Also, have a look at our Youtube video where Justin talks about the power to propel bicycles in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALde6zhLPs0">"School of Watts"</a>.

ebikes.ca

 

[Az.]

What would be interesting to see tested in court (has it ever been? I'm too new to all this to know the history) a motor capable of indefinitely operating at say 500W without overheating, but 'rated' at 250W.

Indeed it would be interesting to watch. Law is very clear in that case. Judge would ask you which part of "no more than 250W continuous rated power" you don't understand and if 500W is more or less than 250W.

...and of course 250W rated motor might be able to operate at 500W. All you need to comply is 250W rating. Just choose motor which is optimal for your application and legal. It can be done is almost all cases.

...or choose illegal motor and be part of the problem.

 

[flecc]

What would be interesting to see tested in court (has it ever been?

It cannot be tested in our courts because it is EU law which we accepted by legally binding treaty in 1972.

Despite our nominally leaving the EU, we have retained the EU law via the Great Repeal Bill that Theresa May as PM put through parliament. That also confirms that the the EU court is the final arbiter, which our High Court accepts is true.
.

 

[flecc]

Indeed it would be interesting to watch. Law is very clear in that case. Judge would ask you which part of "no more than 250W continuous rated power" you don't understand and if 500W is more or less than 250W.

...and of course 250W rated motor might be able to operate at 500W. All you need to comply is 250W rating. Just choose motor which is optimal for your application and legal. It can be done is almost all cases.

...or choose illegal motor and be part of the problem.

No, see this post just above.
.

 

[Woosh]

Opponents have a valid point as long as motors well beyond 250W continuous capability are allowed, and it remains trivial via either settings or dongles to bypass the assistance speed limit.

it's up to the police to enforce the law. Why should enforcement be passed on to manufacturers?

 

[Az.]

It cannot be tested in our courts

Nobody said anything about OUR courts.

 

[Peter.Bridge]

Here is UNECE regulation 85 that defines the maximum continuous rated power of the motor

 

[flecc]

Nobody said anything about OUR courts.

We cannot test it in any other court.

Between 9th May 2003 and 10th November 2003 a window had been provided for us to either propose altering this EU law, or to refuse to accept it at all. That was the final opportunity which we missed when parliament adopted it on the Monday morning of 10th November 2003.

The only action open to us now is to cancel the inclusion of this EU law in the Great Repeal Bill, replacing it with our version in British law. But parliament would never dream of doing that due to the likely severity of the consequences. Such as the cancellation of our temporary EU trade agreement and closure of any possibility of more permanent trade agreements with the EU.
.

 

[flecc]

Here is UNECE regulation 85 that defines the maximum continuous rated power of the motor

Not relevant Peter, being for the following motor vehicles:

• Category M: Vehicles that are primarily used to carry passengers and their luggage.
• Category N: Vehicles that are primarily used to carry goods.

EAPCs are not motor vehicles and anyway, the prescribed motor tests are impossible to carry out without rider input.
.

 

[sjpt]

etc. and IBM left Greenock...

At the time Greenock was really winding down manufacture I got a new ThinkPad; with it came a tiny screw in a plastic bag.
I've no idea what the screw was for, but on the bag was a label
'Made in China, assembled in Scotland'.

 

[Az.]

We cannot test it in any other court.

Flecc do me a favor and disagree with something that I have actually said. Neither me nor Matthew mentioned any specific court. If you want to say something, just say it.

 

[nigelbb]

We cannot test it in any other court.

Between 9th May 2003 and 10th November 2003 a window had been provided for us to either propose altering this EU law, or to refuse to accept it at all. That was the final opportunity which we missed when parliament adopted it on the Monday morning of 10th November 2003.

The only action open to us now is to cancel the inclusion of this EU law in the Great Repeal Bill, replacing it with our version in British law. But parliament would never dream of doing that due to the likely severity of the consequences. Such as the cancellation of our temporary EU trade agreement and closure of any possibility of more permanent trade agreements with the EU.
.

All extant EU regulations were incorporated into UK law with the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (first proposed as the Great Repeal Bill). As Parliament is sovereign the UK is able to replace any or all of what were originally EU regulations with UK rules. I don't know why you would say otherwise. In any case why would the EU care if the UK introduced new standards for power assisted bicycles? The UK is free to change UK laws on pesticides or motor vehicles so what is special about pedelecs?

BTW The EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement has been fully in force since mid-2021. It is not a temporary agreement.

 

[flecc]

Flecc do me a favor and disagree with something that I have actually said. Neither me nor Matthew mentioned any specific court. If you want to say something, just say it.

My reply was to your specific post:

"Nobody said anything about OUR courts"

No other court could be used, final.
.

 

[Az.]

My reply was to your specific post

No it was not. You are jumping in out of the blue and disagree with something nobody has said. Again if you want to say something, say it. Don't get me involved.