proposed new law worse than the old

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby il padrone » Sat Nov 08, 2014 11:02 am

softy wrote:A reasonable road bike can easily do 30km + no drama, so why limit a ebike to a slower speed when it is twice the weight? People want to use ebikes to commute and hoping to make it slightly easier and quicker, to their horror, not likely. For the maybe cyclist, they could buy a ebike, well maybe not. They go slow and are heavy. So how does this add a half way house to encourage cycling, or make longer distances appear short for cycling commuters?
Comparing apples and oranges.

Most people who choose to ride an e-bike are not looking at the carbon road bike option. They are mostly one of:
- middle-aged newbies who have not ridden a bike since their teens;
- older riders (maybe quite experienced) who find their muscular strength is lagging;
- younger people with some form of physical disability that limits their power and/or endurance.

The alternate choice for these riders would usually be a tourer, MTB, or city-bike/hybrid. 25-30 kmh is about the normal speed these riders would expect even if fit, specially as an average over mixed terrain.

I have a friend who loves his Gazelle e-bike. He's 75 and it is the thing that enables him to continue doing 70 km country tours, and maintain a comparable speed wih the rest of our club group. Without it he would only do short 20-30 km dawdles. He is no longer flexible enough to go hunkering down on a road bike, so even were he fit, a roadie would not be an option.

If you are fit enough to spin along at 35-40 kmh, then fine. Ride your roadie - I do not see too much reason for getting an e-bike.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby softy » Sat Nov 08, 2014 5:16 pm

il padrone wrote:
softy wrote:A reasonable road bike can easily do 30km + no drama, so why limit a ebike to a slower speed when it is twice the weight? People want to use ebikes to commute and hoping to make it slightly easier and quicker, to their horror, not likely. For the maybe cyclist, they could buy a ebike, well maybe not. They go slow and are heavy. So how does this add a half way house to encourage cycling, or make longer distances appear short for cycling commuters?
Comparing apples and oranges.

Most people who choose to ride an e-bike are not looking at the carbon road bike option. They are mostly one of:
- middle-aged newbies who have not ridden a bike since their teens;
- older riders (maybe quite experienced) who find their muscular strength is lagging;
- younger people with some form of physical disability that limits their power and/or endurance.

The alternate choice for these riders would usually be a tourer, MTB, or city-bike/hybrid. 25-30 kmh is about the normal speed these riders would expect even if fit, specially as an average over mixed terrain.

I have a friend who loves his Gazelle e-bike. He's 75 and it is the thing that enables him to continue doing 70 km country tours, and maintain a comparable speed wih the rest of our club group. Without it he would only do short 20-30 km dawdles. He is no longer flexible enough to go hunkering down on a road bike, so even were he fit, a roadie would not be an option.

If you are fit enough to spin along at 35-40 kmh, then fine. Ride your roadie - I do not see too much reason for getting an e-bike.
The point I am trying to make here is to get a bigger percentage of the population to cycle. A ebike may look apealing but they have strangled the performance to something less than a city bike. What is so wrong with allowing ebikes to do 30 km as you have pointed out that most people can do.

Joeblake
Posts: 15500
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby Joeblake » Sat Nov 08, 2014 5:31 pm

30 km/h is not fast enough to mix with other motor vehicles. 30 km/h is too fast for cycle paths, especially where they are mixed use, cycle and pedestrian.

If governments were willing to spend money on upgrading cycle paths to handle ONLY cycles, without pedestrians, that would be a different story, but it's highly unlikely that the car driving majority are willing to make a sacrifice of their "registration" bucks to pay for this upgrade, which they would see as an assault on their "right" to drive everywhere. If you want to mix with traffic then get a motorcycle and pay registration and licence fees. I've got two 250 watt e-trikes and a 650cc motorcycle. I use each according to my needs. It's not a problem.

Also, I've found over the past decade or so that 250 w is just "the right size" for free transport. Each of my e-trikes carries sufficient solar panels to keep the batteries charged to ride about 50 km, mixing motor and pedal power. including a rather steep hill at the end. If I had a bigger motor, I would need bigger battery capacity ie heavier, which would mean I either carry more solar panels, and become a hazard on the road, or plug my trike into the mains and start paying for power. No doubt, as battery efficiency increases, size and weight of the battery decreases whilst capacity increases. For me 250 w is the "Goldilocks" size, just right.
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby softy » Sat Nov 08, 2014 5:43 pm

Joeblake wrote:30 km/h is not fast enough to mix with other motor vehicles. 30 km/h is too fast for cycle paths, especially where they are mixed use, cycle and pedestrian.

If governments were willing to spend money on upgrading cycle paths to handle ONLY cycles, without pedestrians, that would be a different story, but it's highly unlikely that the car driving majority are willing to make a sacrifice of their "registration" bucks to pay for this upgrade, which they would see as an assault on their "right" to drive everywhere. If you want to mix with traffic then get a motorcycle and pay registration and licence fees. I've got two 250 watt e-trikes and a 650cc motorcycle. I use each according to my needs. It's not a problem.

Also, I've found over the past decade or so that 250 w is just "the right size" for free transport. Each of my e-trikes carries sufficient solar panels to keep the batteries charged to ride about 50 km, mixing motor and pedal power. including a rather steep hill at the end. If I had a bigger motor, I would need bigger battery capacity ie heavier, which would mean I either carry more solar panels, and become a hazard on the road, or plug my trike into the mains and start paying for power. No doubt, as battery efficiency increases, size and weight of the battery decreases whilst capacity increases. For me 250 w is the "Goldilocks" size, just right.
I think you don't understand my point, it is not the wattage that i am suggesting to be bigger, just the speed cutoff moved to 32km. I don't know if you are aware, most commercial ebikes are rated higher than 250 watts, just electronically limited. With a pedelec, it is not like a motorbike, you need to pedal continously to get any power from the motor,

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby il padrone » Sat Nov 08, 2014 5:55 pm

softy wrote:A ebike may look apealing but they have strangled the performance to something less than a city bike.
Sorry, you have that far from the truth.

People are taking up e-bikes precisely because they ride with the ease and comfort of a city bike but perform much better. You are overplaying the 25 kmh limit here. Most people riding their citybikes would rarely hold much more than 25-30 kmh on flat roads. Many of the fitter riders of city bikes don't really want to (around the inner suburbs). An e-bike gives them these speeds with far less energy expended.
softy wrote:What is so wrong with allowing ebikes to do 30 km as you have pointed out that most people can do.
I'll spell it out again for you. Riding speeds of 35-40 are what is often desired by fit, enthusiast, male riders in the 20-40 age bracket. Often commuting for 20-25 kms in Australia's sprawled suburbs. The market for most e-bikes is not this demographic.

Most people riding e-bikes are pretty happy to get a sustainable, low-energy demanding, 25-30 kmh consistent ride. Sure 30+ kmh may be better, and it will of course be the case on any downhill grades, but it is not so essential. Most of them have the wisdom to realise that the higher speeds don't make such a huge different in travel times, certainly over the 10-15 km medium-trip range; even less for the 5-10 km short trip. A bit like the silly behaviour of the drivers speeding between the traffic lights, it doesn't make such a huge difference around town.

Yes, if you want to get an e-bike for your 45 km commute, they may be a bit slower for you, but you seem to be a fit, fast rider. The rule is what it is. Suck it up and ride the roadie, or maybe a bike-train multi-mode would be a better option. Cycling really has the maximum advantages over shorter distances.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby softy » Sat Nov 08, 2014 7:56 pm

il padrone wrote:
softy wrote:A ebike may look apealing but they have strangled the performance to something less than a city bike.
Sorry, you have that far from the truth.

People are taking up e-bikes precisely because they ride with the ease and comfort of a city bike but perform much better. You are overplaying the 25 kmh limit here. Most people riding their citybikes would rarely hold much more than 25-30 kmh on flat roads. Many of the fitter riders of city bikes don't really want to (around the inner suburbs). An e-bike gives them these speeds with far less energy expended.
softy wrote:What is so wrong with allowing ebikes to do 30 km as you have pointed out that most people can do.
I'll spell it out again for you. Riding speeds of 35-40 are what is often desired by fit, enthusiast, male riders in the 20-40 age bracket. Often commuting for 20-25 kms in Australia's sprawled suburbs. The market for most e-bikes is not this demographic.

Most people riding e-bikes are pretty happy to get a sustainable, low-energy demanding, 25-30 kmh consistent ride. Sure 30+ kmh may be better, and it will of course be the case on any downhill grades, but it is not so essential. Most of them have the wisdom to realise that the higher speeds don't make such a huge different in travel times, certainly over the 10-15 km medium-trip range; even less for the 5-10 km short trip. A bit like the silly behaviour of the drivers speeding between the traffic lights, it doesn't make such a huge difference around town.

Yes, if you want to get an e-bike for your 45 km commute, they may be a bit slower for you, but you seem to be a fit, fast rider. The rule is what it is. Suck it up and ride the roadie, or maybe a bike-train multi-mode would be a better option. Cycling really has the maximum advantages over shorter distances.
Well we are both entitle to our opinion. Although antedotal evidence; what I am mostly seeing on my travels is modified ebikes which far exceed 25km, the other smaller group is the elderly who want the 200 watt throttle option no pedalling.

One may have a different experience, but I'm seeing that aftermarkets kits are more popular because they don't comply to the law and many are real rockets, yes I agree, to fast. This indicates the speed of 25km is a barrier for the majority of people looking at this ebike option. On my commutes I see most riders exceeding 25km on normal bikes. So I don't know how you have come to the conclusion this is most peoples top speed on a flat no wind day, which the ebike limits you too pretty much, as pedaling above this is pretty hard due to the weight and design. I think you should try one before viewing these bikes from a normal riders point of view. They are not like a normal bike where with a little more effort you can gradually increase the speed. When that assistance cuts out it is like hitting a wall.

I spoke to the saleman saling the specialized turbo, which is one of the highest lightest performance commercial ebikes on the market, and they even told me you can only realistically ride them at 25km. These are fit young experienced cyclists saying this.

Okay I agree with the elderly argument, but why should we only limit them to this market?

Joeblake
Posts: 15500
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby Joeblake » Sat Nov 08, 2014 7:58 pm

softy wrote:
I think you don't understand my point, it is not the wattage that i am suggesting to be bigger, just the speed cutoff moved to 32km. I don't know if you are aware, most commercial ebikes are rated higher than 250 watts, just electronically limited. With a pedelec, it is not like a motorbike, you need to pedal continously to get any power from the motor,
Both my trikes' motors are limited to about 197 rpm. With the 16" wheel I peak at 16-17 km/h, with the 26" wheel it peaks at 27 km/h, both without pedalling. The 16" wheel is great for climbing hills, because effectively it is lower geared. The 26" wheel, needs lots of pedalling to climb the same hill but, except for hill climbing, has a higher average speed. I just choose which one I need for the job at hand. If I'm not going down the hill I use the 27". They both have the same wattage - in fact the same make and model of motor.

I can crank the 27" up to about 35 km/h, but the motor is not effective above 27 km/h even though the gearing is high. If I geared it even higher, yes, it would go faster (perhaps) but would probably not be able to take off from a standing start. To go faster, I would need a more powerful motor. Bigger batteries, etc etc.
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby softy » Sat Nov 08, 2014 8:15 pm

Joeblake wrote:
softy wrote:
I think you don't understand my point, it is not the wattage that i am suggesting to be bigger, just the speed cutoff moved to 32km. I don't know if you are aware, most commercial ebikes are rated higher than 250 watts, just electronically limited. With a pedelec, it is not like a motorbike, you need to pedal continously to get any power from the motor,
Both my trikes' motors are limited to about 197 rpm. With the 16" wheel I peak at 16-17 km/h, with the 26" wheel it peaks at 27 km/h, both without pedalling. The 16" wheel is great for climbing hills, because effectively it is lower geared. The 26" wheel, needs lots of pedalling to climb the same hill but, except for hill climbing, has a higher average speed. I just choose which one I need for the job at hand. If I'm not going down the hill I use the 27". They both have the same wattage - in fact the same make and model of motor.

I can crank the 27" up to about 35 km/h, but the motor is not effective above 27 km/h even though the gearing is high. If I geared it even higher, yes, it would go faster (perhaps) but would probably not be able to take off from a standing start. To go faster, I would need a more powerful motor. Bigger batteries, etc etc.
I do believe, we are agreeing here, it doesn't sound much 5km difference, but it feels alot faster when riding. I believe 30km is a nice crusing speed, even 27km, which is very achievable on a normal bike, if the cut out was around 30km, they would sell a heap more ebikes I believe. This could be enough to get more people out of cars.

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby il padrone » Sat Nov 08, 2014 8:25 pm

softy wrote:I spoke to the saleman saling the specialized turbo, which is one of the highest lightest performance commercial ebikes on the market, and they even told me you can only realistically ride them at 25km. These are fit young experienced cyclists saying this.

Okay I agree with the elderly argument, but why should we only limit them to this market?
Because fit young riders should, as I hinted at earlier, HTFU and ride a bike themselves. The idea behind the e-bikes and PABs is power-assist bicycles, not powered bikes. If they need more jazzing-up in their life maybe they should just buy a Vespa, or a Ducati.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

Joeblake
Posts: 15500
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby Joeblake » Sat Nov 08, 2014 8:36 pm

I think as has been mentioned previously, 250 watts is pretty much the standard power rating in Europe, so it seems much more sensible to adopt an existing standard without the hassle of having to get approval from all the states and the commonwealth, than work to a standard "speed".

My older motors pre-date the pedelec debate, and I can tell you there is not a "cut out" like hitting a brick wall. The assistance tapers gradually and I simply use the motor to take off quickly from a standing start, which is where I disagree with pedelec concept. At take off is when I feel I am most vulnerable, and need to have high power, say to avoid a car coming at me in an intersection and my foot slips off the pedal when I attempt to accelerate. With pedelec my understanding is power would be cut off, whereas with a throttle control, such as I currently have, I can use the motor with or without pedalling. A couple off years ago I broke a derailleur on my trike and was unable to pedal without the chain falling off the cluster. I was able to travel the 20+ km back home (including ascending Welshpool Road hill) on just the motor. With pedelec, I would not have been able to do that. Further, because I was carrying my own solar panels on the back, when I DID reach home, I had not flattened the battery. If I'd had a bigger motor, I probably would not have made it home, because the battery would have been discharged more quickly than the panels recharged it had I attempted to travel faster.
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby softy » Sat Nov 08, 2014 10:11 pm

Hi joe,

This is right, the older law was 200 watts but no speed limit, with the pedelec watts increased to 250 but no throttle. The pedelec works by adding a percentage of energy to yours, example: you put in 100 watts and the computer is set to add 50% another 50 watts. Therefore you are right, you wouldn't be able to ride home with a broken derailleur. This how the manufacturers are allowed to have bigger motors, because the software locks the parameters. So for different markets they can just change the program.

So the law was a trade off, more watts but limited top speed with assistance.

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby softy » Sat Nov 08, 2014 10:25 pm

il padrone wrote:
softy wrote:I spoke to the saleman saling the specialized turbo, which is one of the highest lightest performance commercial ebikes on the market, and they even told me you can only realistically ride them at 25km. These are fit young experienced cyclists saying this.

Okay I agree with the elderly argument, but why should we only limit them to this market?
Because fit young riders should, as I hinted at earlier, HTFU and ride a bike themselves. The idea behind the e-bikes and PABs is power-assist bicycles, not powered bikes. If they need more jazzing-up in their life maybe they should just buy a Vespa, or a Ducati.
Hi il padrone,

On many occasions I can see your view point and agree, unfortunately, the view ebikes are for fudie dudie / oldies, disabled or impaired only, I can not agree. The argument HTFU in my view is very narrow and views ebike as some sub class, not "real " bikes.

I see ebikes as an alternative commute to cars, workers can dress for work and not be as sweaty. Facilates at the journey end could be a deterrent to cycle. Ebikes can bridge this gap. I have a more open mind to them being another alternative to commuting like they have been in europe. I do believe in oz people are deterred by the 25km limit.

And that is just my view, but as it stands the law is currently limited to 25km for any 250 watt pedelec

cachexian
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby cachexian » Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:07 pm

I agree with Softly that SOME people are deterred from SOME Ebikes by the 25kph limit.

This group might be the sort of people who are perfectly capable of riding without assistance but don't want to for various reasons.

I, for example, commute 23km with a lot of hills and have no facilities at the end of my commute. I can ride on my roadie no problems but it takes twice the time as a car. On my current Ebike (which is not speed limited but is power limited) I can reduce the commute so that it only takes about 15minutes longer than the car - which I think is acceptable. I still arrive hot and sweaty but I can still cool down fast. I'm also not so exhausted that I'd have trouble working a 10 hour day. I feel that this gives me the opportunity to replace a 50km car drive with some exercise. It doesn't take that much longer but I do have to arrive earlier to give me time to cool down.

I ride mostly on the road or dedicated cycle lane (on the road). In these locations I'm happy to ride flat out and appreciate the fact that my setup gives me some (limited) assistance at higher speeds. The assistance of my system does taper off rather than suddenly stopping.

If I am riding on shared pathways with pedestrians about I try not to allow my speed to get above about 16kph. If most of my commute were on such paths, I don't see the need for a higher cut out speed.

Since Oz adopted the European standard, we have had a boom of quality Ebikes sold here which has been fabulous for the industry and for consumer choice. That is one of the best arguments behind it IMO.

If you tend to ride on the road and are used to higher speeds of riding your roadie on the weekend, a 250W limited to 25kph Upright position heavy Ebike (e.g. Gazelle) will probably not appeal to you. They certainly didn't ever appeal to me.

One kit that I think is worth a try for this type of rider (that I would like to try one day) is a lightweight kit 2.1-3kg hub motor and Lithium battery combo. Put that on a lightweight flat bar road bike it should be great to give assistance up hills but not limit your ability to ride at a normal speed on the flat. SEB Pyrmont have one like this but there are several complete bikes that fit this description on the market now.

Happy cycling.
C.
Scott Sub 40 with 200W, 36v Ezee geared front hub motor
and...
Trek Madonne 3.1 driven by left leg and right leg

Arakasy
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 8:21 am

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby Arakasy » Tue Nov 11, 2014 9:09 am

So 45.7 KPH In a trike is a bit fast huh ? :twisted:

Might have to watch carefully where my assist tops out, I just pump pump pump, I stay in the bicycle lane on roads going in a straight line and pump for top speed.

Any corner worth it's name I have to slow right down to under 10 kph and that's also the speed I use in and around pedestrians and carparks.

Love my Bafang mid drive so much... Ohh btw its 250 w so power limit is legal ?
Don't Panic
And I don't know
Ride casual... Not to casual
They might snap out it's comfortable !!

geebee
Posts: 186
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby geebee » Sat Nov 15, 2014 10:59 am

softy wrote:Hi joe,

This is right, the older law was 200 watts but no speed limit, with the pedelec watts increased to 250 but no throttle. The pedelec works by adding a percentage of energy to yours, example: you put in 100 watts and the computer is set to add 50% another 50 watts. Therefore you are right, you wouldn't be able to ride home with a broken derailleur. This how the manufacturers are allowed to have bigger motors, because the software locks the parameters. So for different markets they can just change the program.

So the law was a trade off, more watts but limited top speed with assistance.
A pedelec does not require that you put any force into pedaling, My Tonaro requires zero pressure to maintain full speed after the initial rotation to start, the BBS01 I just fitted is the same once you have moved a pedal about 1/4 of a turn it is off and you can just fake pedal at 4 rpm if you like, my folder is a 180w hub but I don't use the throttle as like the others after as soon as you pedal the motor runs, this one is rpm related but not load so at 20 rpm maybe 12 kph at 40 ish rpm its at full throttle around 25 kph.

Riding home on a Pedelec with a broken derailleur or chain would not be a problem as long as it was a hub driven bike, obviously a crank drive needs the chain :)

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby softy » Sat Nov 15, 2014 11:18 am

geebee wrote:
softy wrote:Hi joe,

This is right, the older law was 200 watts but no speed limit, with the pedelec watts increased to 250 but no throttle. The pedelec works by adding a percentage of energy to yours, example: you put in 100 watts and the computer is set to add 50% another 50 watts. Therefore you are right, you wouldn't be able to ride home with a broken derailleur. This how the manufacturers are allowed to have bigger motors, because the software locks the parameters. So for different markets they can just change the program.

So the law was a trade off, more watts but limited top speed with assistance.
A pedelec does not require that you put any force into pedaling, My Tonaro requires zero pressure to maintain full speed after the initial rotation to start, the BBS01 I just fitted is the same once you have moved a pedal about 1/4 of a turn it is off and you can just fake pedal at 4 rpm if you like, my folder is a 180w hub but I don't use the throttle as like the others after as soon as you pedal the motor runs, this one is rpm related but not load so at 20 rpm maybe 12 kph at 40 ish rpm its at full throttle around 25 kph.

Riding home on a Pedelec with a broken derailleur or chain would not be a problem as long as it was a hub driven bike, obviously a crank drive needs the chain :)
Are you sure it is a 250w pedelec only? The ones I have riden don't work like this. You stop pedaling it just coasts. You need to pedal to get asist. The only similar thing I have noticed, is if you stand up and pedal hard it will drive the bike forward for a extra metre or so whilst the torque sensor realises you have stopped pedaling then cuts out.

User avatar
outnabike
Posts: 2455
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:53 pm
Location: Melbourne Vic

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby outnabike » Sat Nov 15, 2014 12:00 pm

I don’t like pedelecs and consider them motorcycles. The idea is good but the riders behaviour is unenforceable.
I like the motor driven ones the best, as most of the guys driving them blow e’m up in around a maximum of 10 outings. The monkey bikes with a 12 stone fat fool on board take even less time to blow up…
But there has to be a place for them for sure. But the thing is, it is not long before they are running around at 20 -25 in all sorts of circumstances that a rider of reasonable ability would not do; Both from the point of view of effort and safety.
We have all driven motor bikes as young fellers and it doesn’t take long to get used to the speed, realise that you are an excellent rider, pedal scraping is the thing to achieve etc. etc.
In my area of Hoonville they approach hidden bends at a speed, which must have them on the wrong side of the path, buzz the peds for fun and don’t even realise they are doing it. This is done because they can, no other reason.
I know it is not the pedelec manufactures fault at all or the fault of the general pedelec rider.
It just throws in another element of un-policed or hard to police activity.
All we need to get is a heap of them on the paths after a year that don’t receive the right service and someone is going to be seriously injured with all the court proceedings required in an auto accident and no way of identifying the ride that disappears.
People tend to drive the thing too fast in the areas (once again cos they can),that require lowering of speed, is my observation. I don’t reckon in the main the ones I see are bike riders going for an easier bike, but peds that want an easy trip, (nothing wrong with that), and they don’t believe in any concessions to others. They become boy racers on shared paths without the effort or fitness needed to ride too quickly in the wrong areas.
They buzz bicycles as well and maybe it’s some sort of step up in getting back at cyclists, I don’t know. But I saw a young girl distressed because of one and couldn’t do a thing about it.
Vivente World Randonneur complete with panniers

cachexian
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby cachexian » Sat Nov 15, 2014 2:52 pm

You can't legislate against idiots.

There are plenty of w#nk@rs on Ebikes and there are plenty if fools on standard cycles as well. There are yet more idiots in cars.

Legislating for the lowest common denominator is not great policy.

C.
Scott Sub 40 with 200W, 36v Ezee geared front hub motor
and...
Trek Madonne 3.1 driven by left leg and right leg

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby softy » Sat Nov 15, 2014 4:06 pm

cachexian wrote:You can't legislate against idiots.

There are plenty of w#nk@rs on Ebikes and there are plenty if fools on standard cycles as well. There are yet more idiots in cars.

Legislating for the lowest common denominator is not great policy.

C.
Agreed, we have a mentality for legislating for the lowest common denominator, the idiot. We have a reputation now as the nanny state. I am actually against this, for two reasons, it becomes unmanageable to police and infringes on everyones freedom. Eg: MHL

I see many normal bikes around that are a wreck, which are illegal, without seats and all sorts. Its not just ebikes. Ebikes (commercially legal ones 250 and 200 watts) can't go faster than a racing bike. They are just easier to pedal at lower speeds. If you see electic bikes going faster than this they are highly modified homemade illegal ebikes made up from bits from china.

So back on topic, the thread is what the current law is about. Not about the highly modified electric bikes that are obviously illegal. We can agree these are a menace, but that is for the police to deal with.

geebee
Posts: 186
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby geebee » Sat Nov 15, 2014 6:52 pm

Are you sure it is a 250w pedelec only? The ones I have riden don't work like this. You stop pedaling it just coasts. You need to pedal to get asist. The only similar thing I have noticed, is if you stand up and pedal hard it will drive the bike forward for a extra metre or so whilst the torque sensor realises you have stopped pedaling then cuts out.[/quote]

Yes, the majority of pedelecs need the pedals rotated to continue driving but you can pedal with zero load and just rotate the pedals very slowly, the type you are describing are torque sensor/sensing pedelecs they work by multiplying your input, they a not as common mostly bosch, panasonic, Yamaha crank drives an Bionx hubs they are all expensive, 99% of the cheaper bikes work by detecting pedal rotation irrelevant of power input by the rider.

diventare
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:41 am

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby diventare » Sun Nov 16, 2014 10:30 pm

geebee wrote:
softy wrote:Are you sure it is a 250w pedelec only? The ones I have riden don't work like this. You stop pedaling it just coasts. You need to pedal to get asist. The only similar thing I have noticed, is if you stand up and pedal hard it will drive the bike forward for a extra metre or so whilst the torque sensor realises you have stopped pedaling then cuts out.
Yes, the majority of pedelecs need the pedals rotated to continue driving but you can pedal with zero load and just rotate the pedals very slowly, the type you are describing are torque sensor/sensing pedelecs they work by multiplying your input, they a not as common mostly bosch, panasonic, Yamaha crank drives an Bionx hubs they are all expensive, 99% of the cheaper bikes work by detecting pedal rotation irrelevant of power input by the rider.
Curious then as to how the power is moderated for these motors. If all you have to do is rotate the pedals, without torque sensing, how is the power supplied? Are these cheap bikes operated like a light switch - fully on whilst pedalling and fully off when not?
Image

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby softy » Sun Nov 16, 2014 11:29 pm

diventare wrote:
geebee wrote:
softy wrote:Are you sure it is a 250w pedelec only? The ones I have riden don't work like this. You stop pedaling it just coasts. You need to pedal to get asist. The only similar thing I have noticed, is if you stand up and pedal hard it will drive the bike forward for a extra metre or so whilst the torque sensor realises you have stopped pedaling then cuts out.
Yes, the majority of pedelecs need the pedals rotated to continue driving but you can pedal with zero load and just rotate the pedals very slowly, the type you are describing are torque sensor/sensing pedelecs they work by multiplying your input, they a not as common mostly bosch, panasonic, Yamaha crank drives an Bionx hubs they are all expensive, 99% of the cheaper bikes work by detecting pedal rotation irrelevant of power input by the rider.
Curious then as to how the power is moderated for these motors. If all you have to do is rotate the pedals, without torque sensing, how is the power supplied? Are these cheap bikes operated like a light switch - fully on whilst pedalling and fully off when not?
I haven't riden the Chinese cheapies, so can't comment, only riden the commercial ones (referenced as the expensive ones above).

They work by torque sensing. And you need to pedal proper, but with less effort.

I would suggest you test ride one. They aren't the motorbikes everyone assumes they are.

cachexian
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: proposed new law worse than the old

Postby cachexian » Mon Nov 17, 2014 1:01 pm

Some pedelecs work with power supplied proportional to the speed of rotation of the pedals. With these it is important that the bike is in the correct gear for the hill so that a constant cadence can be maintained. This type of system is not necessarily associated with the cheap brands. Even some of the pricier brands use this type of pedelec system. If you try to go up a hill in a high gear and try to just push the pedals harder you can get caught out without enough assistance.

Others have a torque sensor on the frame or elsewhere.

I am sure that there are some that work like a light switch.

I personally prefer to have a throttle for reasons that have been discussed elsewhere.

C.
Scott Sub 40 with 200W, 36v Ezee geared front hub motor
and...
Trek Madonne 3.1 driven by left leg and right leg

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users