What's in a Name? Or, We Want Our Name Back!

[coops]

No, no..... working pedals are a requirement for the SVA "Low Powered Moped" category.....

Ah, I see:
"low power moped" means a vehicle fitted with pedals and an auxiliary engine of a power output not exceeding 1 kilowatt and a maximum speed not exceeding 25 kilometres per hour being a moped... etc. etc."

So some bikes wouldn't qualify as that even, on speed grounds!

Still, thats (sort of) good news for the use of the name "moped" then, since at least some pedal-bikes with motors are classed as mopeds .

Anyone know of any actual, existent vehicles classed as low-power mopeds then?...

 

[Ian]

Pedals are not a requirement for the current definition of moped, this is classified as a "sub 50cc moped" although I fail to see the point in it. It does nothing a decent bike won't do but needs a licence, insurance etc.

 

[flecc]

Ah, I see:
"low power moped" means a vehicle fitted with pedals and an auxiliary engine of a power output not exceeding 1 kilowatt and a maximum speed not exceeding 25 kilometres per hour being a moped... etc. etc."

So some bikes wouldn't qualify as that even, on speed grounds!

Still, thats (sort of) good news for the use of the name "moped" then, since at least some pedal-bikes with motors are classed as mopeds .

Anyone know of any actual, existent vehicles classed as low-power mopeds then?...

These were the petrol add-ons for bicycles that were around in the 1950s, 25 to 50cc engines then, either over wheel and driving through a friction roller or in the back wheel driving the hub through a chain. There was one marketed as a complete bike, the French Velosolex. There's a current version of the in wheel one but which fits in the front forks.

Here's some on this page, called The Moped Archive.
.

 

[Miles]

Pedals are not a requirement for the current definition of moped, this is classified as a "sub 50cc moped" although I fail to see the point in it. It does nothing a decent bike won't do but needs a licence, insurance etc.

I agree that this category makes no sense, as it stands.

The VOSA factsheet gives the following definition for the "Low Powered Moped" category:

- a moped with pedals
- with auxiliary propulsion not exceeding 1kW
-a maximum design speed not exceeding 25 km/h

Next level in the "Moped" category is "Two Wheeled vehicle" and, as Ian says, there's no pedal requirement.

 

[coops]

These were the petrol add-ons for bicycles that were around in the 1950s, 25 to 50cc engines then

In that case, its complete nonsense that our bikes are not classified as "even lower" power mopeds, given their lower power limit: it creates more confusion & makes them more of an "oddity" (when in fact the idea has been around a century or more!) to call them "bikes with motors" than to call them a class of moped exempt from a licence: do they think people are that stupid they'll not get it? (Maybe for no reason they feared upsetting cyclists by calling such bikes mopeds?) & do they really want to stunt growth in such an important mode of transport for our time by creating an identity & publicity crisis?

 

[Ian]

I think the DoT call our bikes EAPC's - Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles.

 

[Ian]

Velocipede

I have from time to time seen the word velocipede mentioned in vehicle categories, ie. bicycle, tricycle or velocipede. Does anyone know what it is? I imagine a multi wheeled pedal driven machine similar to a bicycle, but I may well be wrong.

 

[Miles]

From the Latin via French: veloci - fast and pede - foot.

It's just a generic name that was used for the earliest bikes, trikes etc. I think.

 

[coops]

not a multi-legged bike then

I think the DoT call our bikes EAPC's - Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles.

Ugh! Yuk! I'm not going to say what I'd call the DoT!

 

[Miles]

http://www.thevelocipede.com/pages/861571/index.htm

 

[Wisper Bikes]

A rose by etc.

Good thread Flecc O Gurusiouse one!

Got me thinking,

The word play on AC/DC and Bi of bicycle would no doubt got me into terrible trouble!

Then I thought of just shortening ELECTRIC BIKE

Elebike.............. no
Ebike................ we already have that and its not too bad.
Ebi................... as in Eeeee by gum
eek..................

Then it hit me

Its got to be an............................ ERIK!!

Or maybe Ebi pronounced EEBEE isn't to bad?

Best regards David

 

[ITSPETEINIT]

What's in a Name? why not WHO?

NOW HEAR THIS!!

Let us acknowledge and honour the Guru ..........................

"VeloFlecc" ...........says it all

Peter

Sorry not to spare your blushes Flec .

 

[Ian]

http://www.thevelocipede.com/pages/861571/index.htm

Thanks Miles, I'm a little wiser now, also a little disapointed that it's not some exotic machine that I hadn't previously come across.

 

[richard]

This has got me intrigued
All these people racking their brains
Attempting a crossword that has no answer !!!

All I can come up with is........
Byceelec

Richard

 

[flecc]

"VeloFlecc" ...........says it all

Peter

My French relatives would appreciate that francophile form, but I think not! I've only been associated with them through most of their forms, not invented them.
.

 

[frank9755]

We need a process!

There’s clearly no shortage of creativity around here! If we are serious about a branding makeover, what we need is a process.

Here’s an idea. We set up a poll (ideally ask Russ to do it so its more official). First everyone who is interested can each nominate one suggested name. We can invite bike companies (those who are still friendly to us!) to nominate as well. Then nominations close and there is a vote. Everyone who nominates and who votes agrees implicitly they will adopt the winning name for electric bikes. Then we a.) start using it and b.) tell everyone else, like the other manufacturers, David Henshaw at A to B, and any other stakeholders we can think of.

Do people think that’s a good plan?
Russ, would you want to chair the process?

Frank

 

[coops]

There’s clearly no shortage of creativity around here!

That's very true Frank! Some great ideas certainly and I've considered a poll myself, but in flecc's initial post he said:

Of course we did have an ideal name for our "bikes", it's Moped of course, but it's been wrongly applied for vehicles that have never usually had pedals. We either need that name back, or we need another equally promotable name for our velocipedes (No, not that!)....

...So we need your thoughts. Either how do we get back our rightful name of Moped? Or, alternatively, we need a new one to popularise our bikes which someone has to dream up. All your ideas very welcome...

We've had lots of ideas for possible new names, but relatively little discussion on how "moped" maybe reclaimed for our bikes, which it seems clear was intended as a point of discussion, perhaps even prior to consideration of alternatives?

Even after that, I'm not sure a poll would be useful, since for general acceptance the name would have to be adopted by everyone and I just don't think a poll would achieve that: there may be a more natural process which would achieve such a result .

I haven't said so before, but I don't think a branding makeover is necessary either: someone can pick a fancy marketing "mass-appeal" name once the bikes are more widely used, but to me that just adds to the importance of us, using them now, choosing a name now that we're happy with and which they may become known by more widely if they take off . As flecc said about the name ideas so far:

There are some really good one's Stuart, but they only really work if it becomes mass market. I-mo for example.

At the moment it's as meaningless to people as I-pod would be if that hadn't taken off world wide.

It's a sort of hand in hand process, the name needs very wide product acceptance, but for wide product acceptance the good name is needed, so they need to catch on together.

It's sad we lost moped to scooters in the early days, since that was perfect for our bikes.

So,for this thread's "remit", I think the first thing is to consider some more how we may be able to reclaim "moped" for our bikes (see previous few posts for a start), and what people think of that as a name could be useful to know too .

Stuart.

 

[frank9755]

Stuart,

I don't think we should try to reclaim 'moped'. As Flecc (I think) makes out earlier in the thread, the fact that it is enshrined in law to mean a different class of vehicle would make it very hard. We'd need an act of Parliament!

However, should moped be nominated and win the vote, that would be the decision I would be happy to abide by, and I would therefore support it, and use it whenever I referred to an electric bike!

I agree with your main point that the critical thing is the name getting adopted. I feel that if 20 or 30 of us all started using the same name, that would be the best start, and I don't see a new name just emerging by a natural process, hence the idea of having a process to pick one.

I'm not wedded to the idea - its just something that ocurred to me as I was riding to work the other morning, so I thought I'd suggest it to see what people think.

Also, I should clarify - by branding makeover I meant nothing more than settling on a new (or even an old) name.

Frank

 

[flecc]

The only chance I can see with Moped is if the DOT would add it to the present list of mopeds, already consisting of classes without and with pedals. Ours could be added to that list at the bottom of the stack, but it would have to be a somewhat informal addition in the UK to avoid inclusion in motor vehicle legislation. It's a long shot, but as there is a likely change in the offing with the Royal Mail wanting e-bike legislation tidied up, it could be a good time to try.
.

 

[Miles]

It's a long shot, but as there is a likely change in the offing with the Royal Mail wanting e-bike legislation tidied up, it could be a good time to try.

What have you heard, flecc?

Can't say I have any great enthusiasm for reclaiming Moped, myself....