Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Positive discussion on ebikes and pedal assist bicycles

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby Joeblake » Sat Oct 16, 2010 12:16 pm

The problem seems to me this issue of e-bikes mixing with traffic. I know reality has a nasty habit of intruding on one's dreams, but I'd rather see "motor" traffic and cycle traffic separated. If you want to keep up with the traffic then an e-bike is not the way to go, you need an e-motor scooter or even e-motorcycle.

I've got two e-trikes and a 650cc petrol motorcycle, and I would not ride either in a manner which tries to emulate the other.

And please, let's not drag helmets in. There's a separate forum for them, and they are totally irrelevant to this discussion.

Joe
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell
Many people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.
Joeblake
 
Posts: 12697
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

by BNA » Sat Oct 16, 2010 3:29 pm

BNA
 

Safe in traffic speed?

Postby alan101 » Sat Oct 16, 2010 3:29 pm

[quote="Joeblake"]'... I'd rather see "motor" traffic and cycle traffic separated. If you want to keep up with the traffic then an e-bike is not the way to go, you need an e-motor scooter or even e-motorcycle....And please, let's not drag helmets in. There's a separate forum for them, and they are totally irrelevant to this discussion'.

Joe, thanks for commenting. In response, my 34km commute to Melb CBD is better than many people's, with 21km off-road on dedicated cycle paths. That still leaves 13.4km that must be negotiated on the roads with traffic. I've been ebiking with the cars for 2.5 years, and I know what I'm on about with being safer when riding closest to surrounding traffic speeds. I also ride an 800cc motorcycle.

The helmet issue is not irrelevant here, although we don't want this thread running off down that avenue (agreed). The sociologist's case that scaring people into compliance can actually reduce the positive activity involved is a sound argument. It's worth reading the Copenhagenize post above. The over-zealous Australian bureaucrats determined to limit ebikes to 25kmh are in the same mould. In holding ebikes down to 25kmh, the proposed legislation will disadvantage the safety of cyclists - most of whom have to mix with traffic at some point in 99% of trips. It's also a disincentive for people to pedal their ebike speed up with physical effort, because the pedalec is out to thwart any such effort by cutting motor power at 23-25kmh. Hence, it reduces rider satisfaction.

Of course we'd all like dedicated cycle paths for all our routes, but it won't happen this year. I posted today how an ebike's speed (including 250w ebike) is physically held down to 38kmh pedal assisted by its weight and wind resistance, so I'm not talking about motorcycle speeds here. Dense urban traffic is often running below the 50-60kmh limit, and ebikes can currently do 34kmh pedal assisted. Why on earth would anyone barrack for cutting this back to 25kmh?! It's taking an innovative and evolving transport medium and making it retarded with a pen. We need a new paradigm to deal with major national health, transport and climate issues; and there's no sign of one from govt to date. With this power assisted cycle legislative proposal we're going backwards. NB. 250w = 0.34hp! We need to reduce the capability of 0.34hp transport, with no evidence of any problem?
User avatar
alan101
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 2:46 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby diggler » Sat Jul 16, 2011 11:30 pm

I don't have an electric bike. I've thought about it, but I'll stick with the regular bike for now. I like the idea of an electric bike and I'll get one day when I get older.

Electric bikes are mean to simulate what an average person would be able to achieve on a bicycle.

There are a lot of hills I wouldn't be able to climb at 25km/h so an electric bike under the proposed laws would be faster than me.

On the flat I should be able to crack 25km/h on my regular bike although the electric bike might struggle to crack that given the extra weight.

On the downhill I would crack 25km/h, but so would the electric bike.

Overall, I think they would be the same speed for me.

In that case, I think the proposed law is quite reasonable.

Any arguments about keeping pace with the traffic are red herrings. You can buy a motorbike if you want to keep pace with the cars.
That's what a fool does. I'm invincible, I'm paying money ... uh ... The girl's happy, she's got no money, I got my rocks off. How good is this?
diggler
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby cachexian » Tue Jul 19, 2011 11:15 pm

diggler wrote:I don't have an electric bike. I've thought about it, but I'll stick with the regular bike for now. I like the idea of an electric bike and I'll get one day when I get older.

Electric bikes are mean to simulate what an average person would be able to achieve on a bicycle.

There are a lot of hills I wouldn't be able to climb at 25km/h so an electric bike under the proposed laws would be faster than me.


A 200W even 250W motor would not be able to go up a hill at any speed. If I can pedal my normal bike up a steep hill at 8kph the assistance of the motor would help me go up the same hill at about 18kph - I still need to be putting in the same effort I was. The 200W motor will not take me up on its own.

Alan's talking about the speed at which the assistance tapers off. I agree that a 250W motor with max speed of 25kph would be slower than most other cyclists. The actual power of assistance at top speed is so paltry that on a flat stretch you'd prob achieve an average speed of much much less than 25. If you ride an ebike, you'll understand what I mean.

C
Scott Sub 40 with 200W, 36v Ezee geared front hub motor
and...
Trek Madonne 3.1 driven by left leg and right leg
cachexian
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby diggler » Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:21 am

I don't know how steep are the hills you are climbing, but if I went up the hill on Parramatta Road Sydney past Fort Street High at 18km/h, I would be very satisfied.
That's what a fool does. I'm invincible, I'm paying money ... uh ... The girl's happy, she's got no money, I got my rocks off. How good is this?
diggler
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby cachexian » Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:07 am

Agreed. I would be satisfied with that. In fact I'm thrilled every time I ride my ebike.

I was only trying to clarify that a top speed of 25kph doesn't mean that the ebike will go up a hill at 25 as I thought you were saying in your post.

But the important thing about top speed is not the hill climbing ability. On the flat how fast do you go? I bet it's 30- 35kph (if you're fit maybe up to 40kph?).

IMO the purpose of ebikes is to (among other things):
-assist less able (or unfit) people get into cycling
-assist commuters getting to work not sweaty
-provide a viable low carbon commuting alternative for motorists
An ebike with a governed top speed of 25kph will achieve these goals but it will be significantly slower overall than an average cyclist (whatever that may be). IMO this is not as good as it could be.

I think that a lot of cyclists have an image of ebikers in their heads as whizzing along on shared paths and bike lanes at furiously high speeds without pedalling. That's not how it is with legal electric bikes. Current legal ebikes when used with pedal assistance are pretty similar in speed to an "average cyclist" overall.

But if the new laws are passed, I think that the bikes will probably be a bit worse in fulfilling the above aims and simulating the "average cyclist" (despite the modest increase in power). Imagine this image: commuting ebikers tootling along the bus lane on parramatta road at 25kph on the flat (getting in your way as you try to pass them) maybe a bit faster on downhill stretches (again you try to pass them because on your road bike you can pedal power downhill much faster than the average ebiker) then the ebikers catch you up again as you work up the hills then the whole process starts again... It'd be worse in a bike lane (such as Marion St Leichhardt) because you don't then have room to pass them when they're in your way.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what I think. The people's opinion is irrelevant when it comes to introducing legislation.
Scott Sub 40 with 200W, 36v Ezee geared front hub motor
and...
Trek Madonne 3.1 driven by left leg and right leg
cachexian
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby Joeblake » Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:16 pm

cachexian wrote:Anyway, it doesn't matter what I think. The people's opinion is irrelevant when it comes to introducing legislation.


It DOES matter what you think. It also matters (very much) how you say it.

I've got several decades of experience in both politics and law, and I know that both courts and lawmakers are not going to waste time taking notice of irrelevant rubbish ... which is as it should be.

In both this thread and the "new law" thread I've been hammering the point of relevance. If you really wish to make a difference, put in a submission which addresses the real issues.

If you put something in which talks about the difference between e-bikes and electric motorcycles, that is going to get ignored because it doesn't give anything useful for the lawmakers to work with. It has absolutely no relevance to electric assist cycles.

There's no point writing about how "sporty" e-bikes are. That's of absolutely no moment whatsoever.

If you put in a crappy submission to the pollies, they may write you a letter acknowledging receipt, but they're highly unlikely to take time to read your submission, grade, and write you a critique of how you should have done it. They'll simply ignore it, and you'll have achieved nothing.

You can say that you want to have 500 watts of power and travel at 60 kph as often as you like, but if you just keep repeating it and repeating it without supplying some concrete facts, you're just going to be piddling into the wind.

In the "Proposed New law is worse than the old" thread I just re-read the first two pages, and I cannot see one instance where there has been a definitive statement as to WHICH part of the law is worse. Which sentence, which paragraph, even which word(s). It's just one big long whinge. I can't even find a substantive link to the proposed legislation. The thread opens with:

Has anyone read the "power-assisted_pedal_cycles-proposal_for_a_new_ab_vehicle_definition-may_2009" pdf, the document submitted to the Government by the RTA proposing a revision to the current electric bicycle law? A document more devoid of any rationality you are unlikely ever to see. Lots of clever sounding rhetoric, but zero common sense. In short, the proposed law seems to have been engineered to comply with two main requirements.

How is someone else able to find this document to check through it and comment?

If somebody doesn't like something in the proposed legislation, spell it out, be specific, but above all be relevant.

This is a matter of LAW. You have to deal with it in the appropriate manner. Take it seriously.

Joe
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell
Many people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.
Joeblake
 
Posts: 12697
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby diggler » Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:06 pm

cachexian wrote:Agreed. I would be satisfied with that. In fact I'm thrilled every time I ride my ebike.

I was only trying to clarify that a top speed of 25kph doesn't mean that the ebike will go up a hill at 25 as I thought you were saying in your post.

But the important thing about top speed is not the hill climbing ability. On the flat how fast do you go? I bet it's 30- 35kph (if you're fit maybe up to 40kph?).

IMO the purpose of ebikes is to (among other things):
-assist less able (or unfit) people get into cycling
-assist commuters getting to work not sweaty
-provide a viable low carbon commuting alternative for motorists
An ebike with a governed top speed of 25kph will achieve these goals but it will be significantly slower overall than an average cyclist (whatever that may be). IMO this is not as good as it could be.

I think that a lot of cyclists have an image of ebikers in their heads as whizzing along on shared paths and bike lanes at furiously high speeds without pedalling. That's not how it is with legal electric bikes. Current legal ebikes when used with pedal assistance are pretty similar in speed to an "average cyclist" overall.

But if the new laws are passed, I think that the bikes will probably be a bit worse in fulfilling the above aims and simulating the "average cyclist" (despite the modest increase in power). Imagine this image: commuting ebikers tootling along the bus lane on parramatta road at 25kph on the flat (getting in your way as you try to pass them) maybe a bit faster on downhill stretches (again you try to pass them because on your road bike you can pedal power downhill much faster than the average ebiker) then the ebikers catch you up again as you work up the hills then the whole process starts again... It'd be worse in a bike lane (such as Marion St Leichhardt) because you don't then have room to pass them when they're in your way.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what I think. The people's opinion is irrelevant when it comes to introducing legislation.


Obviously I don't understand how these things work so you will have to help me. Why am I passing you on the flat and downhill? You have up to 250W more than me. Your only downside is the weight of the motor and battery. Surely you have a lightweight lithium ion battery. I have a 20 to 25km/h average speed on my ride which is pretty average for a commuter I would think.
That's what a fool does. I'm invincible, I'm paying money ... uh ... The girl's happy, she's got no money, I got my rocks off. How good is this?
diggler
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby cachexian » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:53 pm

Joeblake wrote:
cachexian wrote:
In both this thread and the "new law" thread I've been hammering the point of relevance. If you really wish to make a difference, put in a submission which addresses the real issues.

Joe


I'm not sure if all your comment was directed at me or at Alan101 but I do get your point Joe.
Scott Sub 40 with 200W, 36v Ezee geared front hub motor
and...
Trek Madonne 3.1 driven by left leg and right leg
cachexian
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby cachexian » Thu Jul 21, 2011 8:47 am

Hi diggler,

It's not relevant to the discussion of laws in this thread but I will post a response to your question in a new thread.

Composing it now.

C.
Scott Sub 40 with 200W, 36v Ezee geared front hub motor
and...
Trek Madonne 3.1 driven by left leg and right leg
cachexian
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby Comedian » Wed Aug 17, 2011 9:52 pm

diggler wrote:
cachexian wrote:Agreed. I would be satisfied with that. In fact I'm thrilled every time I ride my ebike.

I was only trying to clarify that a top speed of 25kph doesn't mean that the ebike will go up a hill at 25 as I thought you were saying in your post.

But the important thing about top speed is not the hill climbing ability. On the flat how fast do you go? I bet it's 30- 35kph (if you're fit maybe up to 40kph?).

IMO the purpose of ebikes is to (among other things):
-assist less able (or unfit) people get into cycling
-assist commuters getting to work not sweaty
-provide a viable low carbon commuting alternative for motorists
An ebike with a governed top speed of 25kph will achieve these goals but it will be significantly slower overall than an average cyclist (whatever that may be). IMO this is not as good as it could be.

I think that a lot of cyclists have an image of ebikers in their heads as whizzing along on shared paths and bike lanes at furiously high speeds without pedalling. That's not how it is with legal electric bikes. Current legal ebikes when used with pedal assistance are pretty similar in speed to an "average cyclist" overall.

But if the new laws are passed, I think that the bikes will probably be a bit worse in fulfilling the above aims and simulating the "average cyclist" (despite the modest increase in power). Imagine this image: commuting ebikers tootling along the bus lane on parramatta road at 25kph on the flat (getting in your way as you try to pass them) maybe a bit faster on downhill stretches (again you try to pass them because on your road bike you can pedal power downhill much faster than the average ebiker) then the ebikers catch you up again as you work up the hills then the whole process starts again... It'd be worse in a bike lane (such as Marion St Leichhardt) because you don't then have room to pass them when they're in your way.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what I think. The people's opinion is irrelevant when it comes to introducing legislation.


Obviously I don't understand how these things work so you will have to help me. Why am I passing you on the flat and downhill? You have up to 250W more than me. Your only downside is the weight of the motor and battery. Surely you have a lightweight lithium ion battery. I have a 20 to 25km/h average speed on my ride which is pretty average for a commuter I would think.


I must admit I have trouble with this too. So ebikers want to be faster up hills than most. If they are prepared to pedal (gasp) they should be faster downhill than most due to all the extra weight (like bike for like bike). The only area that they perceive themselves to be at a loss is on the flat where under the new law if they want to go faster than 25kph they will have to do it by pedal power alone (gasp) just like everyone else.

I really just don't see the problem with this? If it stops one teenager blasting around our bike paths strapped to a electric motorbike then I think it's good legislation. The fact that they are removing throttles and forcing people to pedal to access the assistance is a masterstroke too. :)
Once you can climb hills on a bike it's all downhill. :mrgreen:

Hopefully I'll know what that's like..... one day. :shock: :lol:

Image
User avatar
Comedian
 
Posts: 4401
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: Brisbane

Proposed 250w/25kmh: who are the players?

Postby alan101 » Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:41 pm

In terms of putting submissions up on the proposed 250w/25kmh legislation in Australia, I have put submissions to: the Board of Bicycle Victoria, Adam Bandt (Greens MP), Julia Gillard, Peter Garrett, Stephen Hodge (Cycling Promotion Fund), Steven Hoy (Vehicle Safety Standards Div, fed Department of Infrastructure), Scott Ludlam (Greens Senator, spokesman for Sustainable planning & transport), Greg Hunt (Shadow minister for the environment), Tim Pallas (Lab, Vic MP, Minister for Roads and Transport), and Graham Bradshaw (Executive, Retail Cycle Traders Australia). In >50% of cases, I haven't even received acknowledgement of an issue being lodged.

The Retail Cycle Traders Australia rep was very disappointing when he told me that you can always pedal up the 250w/25kmh ebike past 25kmh. It showed a singular lack of insight into ebikes, because their weight and wind resistance >30kmh won't see them going much past 28kmh for commuting distances. The Victorian Roads Minister (Labour) sent me a response with the same mis-apprehension, via Julia Gillard's office; to whom I also sent this conceptual correction, for her to pass back.

The Aug 2011 Vic Auditor General's report mentioned this group: Victorian Bicycle Advisory Council (VBAC), a broad based forum established to provide the State Government (through the Minister for Roads and Ports) with strategic policy and program advice on cycling matters. The VBAC consists of representatives from the following organisations: Bicycle Victoria, RACV, Victoria Police, VicRoads, Parks Victoria, Sport and Recreation Victoria, VicHealth, Victorian Local Governance Association, Municipal Association Victoria, ARRB Group, Cycling retailers, Bicycle manufacturing industry, and Community members from regional Victoria. Terms of reference for we bikers: members of the public may raise issues for consideration by VBAC through an appropriate VBAC member such as Bicycle Victoria or VicRoads.

These guys are marching in lock step on the 250w/25kmh EU ebike standard. Most of them have probably never even sat on an ebike, and many probably aren't cyclists. This umbrella group are a closed shop, in that I can't put a submission on why ebikes should retain throttles and not be speed limited (something which mechanically and in natural physics terms isn't going to go fast). My ebike shop manager has visited the Dept of Infrastructure guys in Canberra about a large national ebike project he has managed for 3 years, and along with a Qld ebike shop owner I talked with, are just exacerbated by DoI's complete lack of understanding of electric propulsion systems. It's the blind leading the blind, leading to bureacratic over regulation of an innocuous transport form.

Bicycle Victoria don't represent the views of existing ebike manufacturers/retailers nor ebike riders, they are pushing for bike retailers who want EU off-the-shelf ebikes to capitalise on. No one wants to pay for a proper study of ebike benefits/issues, or develop useful Australian Safety Standards. We never hear mention of brakes that stop in x distance with an 85kg rider, wheels that don't go wobbly, lights visible to cars as you enter a roundabout, or racks that can carry a load without failing. So copying the constrictive EU 250w/25kmh standard is seen as a cheap way to open Australia to a more worldly ebike standard that would avail us of 250w ebikes from Europe and Japan. While such 250w ebikes are increasingly technologically advanced within their EU standard straight jacket, they fall well short of what could be a much better quick commuter ride. And I mean a 250w ebike that would do 38kmh if unlimited, extrapolating from my legal 200w ebike managing 32-34kmh pedal-assisted flat/calm. My weekend (unassisted) road bike 50km run on Beach Road regularly returns a 45kmh max on the bike computer (67kmh is my best downhill), and last weekend a 29.6kmh average over 50km.

The Australian 250w/25kmh ebike research by NSW RTA never examined how current Australian ebikes perform. They never talked to existing Aust ebike manufacturers/retailers nor ebikers. Attempts by one knowledgeable current Aust ebike manaufacturer (10y as an ebike retailer, with a degree in electronics) to input to the new standard's design were met by deaf ears from Bicycle NSW and NSW RTA. He's completely pissed by the experience, and wants nothing more to do with the process. Bicycle Victoria's response to my 14p/40 item paper took 5 months to get back to me after their board meeting (I had to ask for one), and was about 1 line - 'We're not changing'. He who pays the piper calls the tune, and the research tune was pre-determined as 250w/25kmh EU standard. Any other input is dismissed as one-off idiosyncratic home build jobs. My ebike has been so described by Bicycle Victoria, but has been commercially available here for longer than the 3 years that I've had an interest in ebikes. You don't bother telling them this again after submitting a 14p paper, because they have 'no reply' in their email address.

Someone above said ebikes doing >25kmh to be safe in traffic is a red herring. B**ls**t. If I'm slow and someone wants to turn left across my path, they probably will. If I'm moving fast they're more likely to pull in behind me and let me pass. In Inner Melbourne, traffic is often doing 30-50kmh. If I can ride on a car's rear quarter, no one's going to come at me and turn right across my path. This is basic motorcycle strategy for staying safe, and is published by VicRoads as such. A bike dawdling along on a main road at 15kmh weaving in and out of parked cars is more likely to take a hit than someone riding in their lane at 30-35kmh, which any urban commuter or roadie cyclist would probably acknowledge. It's a mistake to limit ebikes to 25kmh max to keep pedestrians safe on shared paths, and have the on-road cyclist's journey rendered more hazardous. A slow bike on a main road can slow arterial route traffic in rush hour to <20kmh, if there's no shoulder too hide in. The Vic Auditor General's report found that 45mins is an approx max time that commuters are willing to cycle, so a 30kmh bike will more than double the catchment of potential cyclists compared with cyclists riding 15kmh.

The red herring is that ebikes and non-ebikes can't share the same paths, because I've been doing this for 3 years. Me on ebike doing 32kmh (pedal assisted flat/calm) isn't fast enough to keep up with 3 out of 20 (unassisted) riders (sometimes on mtbs!) on my work commute route. Victoria is investing $115mil over 10y in bike infrastructure, and why should we be limited to 25kmh because Tasmania or SA doesn't set the same priority for cycling infrastructure? And if they don't have bike paths, the ebiker's metro on-road journey is rendered more dangerous having speed capped at 25kmh - being less in-sync with surrounding traffic.

It is worth writing to pollies, because they pass these comments and questions on to the relevant dept (Vehicle Safety Standards Div, fed Department of Infrastructure). This department's excuse for doing almost nothing to progress the 250w/25kmh ebike legislation for probably the first 9 months they sat on it (NSW RTA handed it to them approx 1.5y ago), was that it wasn't a priority. If politicians are asking them questions about it, it is more likely to gain some level of priority in the dept's workflow. An Aust pollie once said that parliamentarians are 10 years behind the rest of the country in understanding climate change. I've yet to see any political leadership on ebikes from any of the pollies I've contacted. They basically shuffle your bit of paper to whatever dept takes their fancy (eg Dept of Innovation), it gets passed on, and eventually the responsible dept replies saying 'thanks, but our mind is already made up'; if you can get anything out of them at all, that is. Where's the discussion paper on ebikes from fed Dept of Infrastructure (there isn't) and call for public submissions? State and fed govt have been on this issue for 3 years, and it's only copying an existing standard (EU 250w/25kmh) for f#@k sake! Small wonder there are melting glaciers on the planet - if only they melted at govt pace. What happens when India, Indo-China and China have 3 months per year less snow melt for the Ganges, Mekong and Yangtze rivers? It's coming.

Frankly, we're better off with current 200w speed-unrestricted ebikes than 23-25kmh motor cut-out jobs with pedalec controls. I have both motors at home, and the EU 250w one has been a real turn-off, that has seen me switch to my flat bar bike for 12km trips to the pool and reverting to the car for shopping. I'm putting the 200w unit back on asap (another bike project has precedence).

Don't imagine that this process is being handled as anything like participative democracy. Quite the contrary, it's being managed as a closed shop (by people with little or no experience of ebikes), probably for the benefit of bike retailers. Ebikes are being set up for a major nobble. Daft, given all the lip service about managing climate change. An ebike moves a person using 1% of the caloric energy in fuel that a car uses. If ebikes aren't utilitarian, people will stick with petrol as it packs better bang for the buck and has an established distribution network. Improved battery technology is making ebikes lighter and closer in weight to their unassisted bike counter-parts; with 7kg difference on my rig. A pedestrian advocate (Mr Screwby, NSW) is credited with getting the proposed ebike standard down to 25kmh speed limiting, and the original Australia Bicycle Council (fed Dept of Transport) push on ebikes 3y ago was for 300w ebikes; which NZ subsequently had the courage to implement; but our lot backed down on, obfuscated and sat on.

A comment on the pedalec controller. People over 40y age are currently one of the main user groups for ebikes. If a person has arthritis, weak knees or is otherwise unable to apply full power to the pedals, they will not gain access to full power from a pedalec controlled ebike. I saw a post on UK forum 'Pedalec' that a bike shop owner went into shock when told the UK might/would enforce the EU standard that ebikes are required to have a pedalec control, as half his clients wouldn't be able to access full power.

My throttle works just fine controlling my ebike's speed. I don't need more wiring/sensor and a computer involved. If pedalec controls are so cool, let them sell on their merits, but don't mandate them as compulsory. Pedalec control can actually be quite jerky when riding 23-25kmh, as the power jumps in/out completely. If I'm crossing a 4 lane highway with big trucks bearing down, I want 100% throttle; not futzing around trying to get my foot in the styrup/clip. There are reportedly people who like pedalec control, and good on em. It doesn't make it acceptable to deny me my throttle.

250w = 0.35hp, so the proposed legislation is 'giving us' an extra 0.07hp. You have to look to model airplanes to find anything comparable moving with so little power. And some guys on this forum are wetting themselves in fear of the holocaust that's coming. Small cajones.
Last edited by alan101 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
alan101
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 2:46 pm

Re: Proposed 250w/25kmh: who are the players?

Postby Joeblake » Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:44 pm

alan101 wrote: And some guys on this forum are wetting themselves in fear of the holocaust that's coming. Small cajones.


Don't worry. When the holocaust comes, there'll be no cars on the road because there'll be no oil, and you'll able to ride as fast as you like ... assuming there's electricity to recharge your batteries.

It'll probably be those people with the smaller motors who can carry their solar recharge station with them that will be riding past you. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Joe
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell
Many people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.
Joeblake
 
Posts: 12697
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

Re: Proposed 250w/25kmh: who are the players?

Postby Comedian » Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:05 pm

alan101 wrote:GIANT SNIP

The Retail Cycle Traders Australia rep was very disappointing when he told me that you can always pedal up the 250w/25kmh ebike past 25kmh. It showed a singular lack of insight into ebikes, because their weight and wind resistance >30kmh won't see them going much past 28kmh for commuting distances.


So what you're saying is that ebikes are so heavy now that you can't pedal them to make any difference once the motor cuts out. So to counter this you want ungoverned e-bikes with 500w ... plus you'll need monumental batteries, and then heavier frames, wheels, tyres...

It hasn't dawned on you yet I gather? The more power you put into a machine the heavier and larger all the systems have to be to support it and therefore the more dependent it becomes on electric propulsion and less of a "push" bike it becomes. IMHO by the time you get to your power nirvana the rider will only be able to pedal the thing 100m to get it out of trouble when the battery shuts down.

alan101 wrote:Giant SNIP

Someone above said ebikes doing >25kmh to be safe in traffic is a red herring. B**ls**t. If I'm slow and someone wants to turn left across my path, they probably will. If I'm moving fast they're more likely to pull in behind me and let me pass. In Inner Melbourne, traffic is often doing 30-50kmh. If I can ride on a car's rear quarter, no one's going to come at me and turn right across my path. This is basic motorcycle strategy for staying safe, and is published by VicRoads as such. A bike dawdling along on a main road at 15kmh weaving in and out of parked cars is more likely to take a hit than someone riding in their lane at 30-35kmh, which any urban commuter or roadie cyclist would probably acknowledge. It's a mistake to limit ebikes to 25kmh max to keep pedestrians safe on shared paths, and have the on-road cyclist's journey rendered more hazardous. A slow bike on a main road can slow arterial route traffic in rush hour to <20kmh, if there's no shoulder too hide in. The Vic Auditor General's report found that 45mins is an approx max time that commuters are willing to cycle, so a 30kmh bike will more than double the catchment of potential cyclists compared with cyclists riding 15kmh.


So now we want e-bikes that can effortlessly travel in the 30-50kph range so you can keep up with motor traffic. Again - why not just buy an electric motorbike? They are available right now?
Once you can climb hills on a bike it's all downhill. :mrgreen:

Hopefully I'll know what that's like..... one day. :shock: :lol:

Image
User avatar
Comedian
 
Posts: 4401
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Proposed 250w/25kmh: who are the players?

Postby Joeblake » Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:22 pm

alan101 wrote:
The Retail Cycle Traders Australia rep was very disappointing when he told me that you can always pedal up the 250w/25kmh ebike past 25kmh. It showed a singular lack of insight into ebikes, because their weight and wind resistance >30kmh won't see them going much past 28kmh for commuting distances.


Yet another reason to get on a recumbent. Much less wind resistance. This means you can go further, faster on the same battery charge compared to a "wedgie". :lol: :lol: You can then have smaller batteries, which will reduce the weight overall.


Joe
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell
Many people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.
Joeblake
 
Posts: 12697
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

Re: Proposed 250w/25kmh: who are the players?

Postby alan101 » Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:29 pm

[quote="Comedian"][quote="alan101"] said, "So to counter this you want ungoverned e-bikes with 500w". That is nothing resembling what I said, and my discussion was around the 250w ebike proposal. I think you're the only person on this thread in the last 2 weeks talking about 500w ebikes, 500w ebike nirvana, etc.

Comedian said, "So now we want e-bikes that can effortlessly travel in the 30-50kph range so you can keep up with motor traffic". In reply, my legal 200w ebike pedals at 32-34kmh for commute distances, and 38-40kmh for sprints (eg make a green light, or dodge incoming car failing to give way at roundabout). Why do you want to see this capability nobbled, given there currently is no problem? You simply like being controlled? I can get my (unassisted) roadie up to 45kmh, so why the shock and horror - don't get out much?
Last edited by alan101 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 3:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
alan101
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 2:46 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby Joeblake » Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:41 pm

So you're now trying to claim you've been misquoted? Oh, dear. Lucky it doesn't happen very often.

By the way, it would help to follow your argument (as well as minimising the chance of misquotation) if you learned how to use the cut and paste properly. It's been designed to be used easily. You seem to be cutting off the "closing quote" labels - ie [/ quote] . You need to have a closing quote label for each opening quote label.

Joe
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell
Many people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.
Joeblake
 
Posts: 12697
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

Re: Proposed 250w/25kmh: who are the players?

Postby Comedian » Sun Aug 21, 2011 3:14 pm

alan101 wrote:
Comedian wrote:
alan101 wrote: said, "So to counter this you want ungoverned e-bikes with 500w". That is nothing resembling what I said, and my discussion was around the 250w ebike proposal. I think you're the only person on this thread in the last 2 weeks talking about 500w ebikes, 500w ebike nirvana, etc.

Comedian said, "So now we want e-bikes that can effortlessly travel in the 30-50kph range so you can keep up with motor traffic". In reply, my legal 200w ebike pedals at 32-34kmh for commute distances, and 38-40kmh for sprints (eg catch a greenlight). Why do you want to see this capability nobbled, given there currently is no problem? You simply like being controlled?


Well how much throttle controlled un-governed power would you like to see an e-bike have? How fast do you think an e-bike should be able to go? Let's clear it up.
Once you can climb hills on a bike it's all downhill. :mrgreen:

Hopefully I'll know what that's like..... one day. :shock: :lol:

Image
User avatar
Comedian
 
Posts: 4401
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby Joeblake » Sun Aug 21, 2011 3:54 pm

Alan101,

Again, sneaking in and rewriting your post? You don't have any idea of how despicable that is.

Joe
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell
Many people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.
Joeblake
 
Posts: 12697
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby Kalgrm » Sun Aug 21, 2011 4:30 pm

Joe,

You can quote Alan101 if you think he might change the meaning of his posts later, thereby stopping his self-edifying edits from being effective.

Unfortunately, there is nothing in our rules to stop people changing their posts within 48 hour of the original. Yes, it's dishonest, but there is nothing we can do about it.

Cheers,
Graeme
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------------------------
My web site: www.scenebyhird.com
---------------------------------------
The Bicycle Transportation Alliance
User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 9236
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Spearwood, 9km SE of Fremantle, WA

250w ebike - could be good.

Postby alan101 » Sun Aug 21, 2011 5:23 pm

For Comedian.
There is currently a govt proposal to allow 250w ebikes, which at face value seems like an improvement on the 200w current limit. I'm OK with that. I don't like pedalec control, so want to see my current throttle allowed (reasons stated above). I think 23-25kmh cutout to the motor is bureaucratic overkill, something one could glean from the NSW RTA paper which explicitly said speed limiting is not required for 250w. Extrapolating from my 200w rig's 32-34kmh top speed pedal-assisted flat/calm, I'm quite certain that a 250w ebike won't go much over 38kmh for any distance.

So 250w with a throttle and no speed limiting is a simple and utilitarian scenario for a decent commuting ebike. If you examine existing legal ebike performance in Australia, this is minor league change. The way the motor is built, along with an ebike's weight and wind resistance over 30kmh, will all conspire to limit it to <40kmh for rides over 1km distance. You can go a tad wee bit faster for a sprint, but pushing 20-30+kg is soon going to knacker you. This is well below hoon appeal territory, and well within existing unassisted bike performance parameters. In response to 'why bother?', when one commutes home 34km from Melb CBD into a 15-25kn SW'ly headwind, the ebike is my preference.

If 250w ebikes are speed limited with motor cutout at 23-25kmh (EU standard) I'd prefer my existing legal 200w ebike. As stated, I'm taking an EU 250w hub motor off my rig, and replacing it with my original 200w motor; chalked up as a failed experiment. The 200w might go farther, too, with a 36v 10 or 14Ah li-ion battery a given.

UK ebikers are in a double bind. They can't get their ebike rules changed if the UK govt wanted to, because they're under EU regulation. Our ebike rule change is to the Australian Standard, and is likely to stand for the next 20y. So don't bandy about nobbling lightly. We're trying to get people out of 80+hp (107+ Kw) vehicles and onto bikes, reduce pollution, improve fitness and make cities more liveable.

So Comedian, what's your ideal ebike's spec? You've already expressed delight that it could have a pedalec controller.
User avatar
alan101
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 2:46 pm

Re: 250w ebike - could be good.

Postby Joeblake » Sun Aug 21, 2011 5:27 pm

alan101 wrote:For Comedian.
There is currently a govt proposal to allow 250w ebikes, which at face value seems like an improvement on the 200w current limit. I'm OK with that. I don't like pedalec control, so want to see my current throttle allowed (reasons stated above). I think 23-25kmh cutout to the motor is bureaucratic overkill, something one could glean from the NSW RTA paper which explicitly said speed limiting is not required for 250w. Extrapolating from my 200w rig's 32-34kmh top speed pedal-assisted flat/calm, I'm quite certain that a 250w ebike won't go much over 38kmh for any distance.

So 250w with a throttle and no speed limiting is a simple and utilitarian scenario for a decent commuting ebike. If you examine existing legal ebike performance in Australia, this is minor league change. The way the motor is built, along with an ebike's weight and wind resistance over 30kmh, will all conspire to limit it to <40kmh for rides over 1km distance. You can go a tad wee bit faster for a sprint, but pushing 20-30+kg is soon going to knacker you. This is well below hoon appeal territory, and well within existing unassisted bike performance parameters. In response to 'why bother?', when one commutes home 34km from Melb CBD into a 15-25kn SW'ly headwind, the ebike is my preference.

If 250w ebikes are speed limited with motor cutout at 23-25kmh (EU standard) I'd prefer my existing legal 200w ebike. As stated, I'm taking an EU 250w hub motor off my rig, and replacing it with my original 200w motor; chalked up as a failed experiment. The 200w might go farther, too, with a 36v 10 or 14Ah li-ion battery a given.

UK ebikers are in a double bind. They can't get their ebike rules changed if the UK govt wanted to, because they're under EU regulation. Our ebike rule change is to the Australian Standard, and is likely to stand for the next 20y. So don't bandy about nobbling lightly. We're trying to get people out of 80+hp (107+ Kw) vehicles and onto bikes, reduce pollution, improve fitness and make cities more liveable.

So Comedian, what's your ideal ebike's spec? You've already expressed delight that it could have a pedalec controller.
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell
Many people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.
Joeblake
 
Posts: 12697
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

Re: 250w ebike - could be good.

Postby Joeblake » Sun Aug 21, 2011 5:37 pm

alan101 wrote:If 250w ebikes are speed limited with motor cutout at 23-25kmh (EU standard) I'd prefer my existing legal 200w ebike. As stated, I'm taking an EU 250w hub motor off my rig, and replacing it with my original 200w motor; chalked up as a failed experiment. The 200w might go farther, too, with a 36v 10 or 14Ah li-ion battery a given.



So there's your answer. It's been staring you in the face the whole time. Stay with 200 watts. Your "failed experiment" sounds like you didn't do your homework before rushing in.

Joe
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell
Many people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.
Joeblake
 
Posts: 12697
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

I just edited the title of this post

Postby alan101 » Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:07 pm

I edit my content to support a theme, which is dominantly 200-250w ebikes and related legislation in this thread. I must have made one or more points today that Joe disagrees with, again; boosting my status to despicable. The moderator acknowledges 48 hrs from posting when edits are allowed. And you thought the edit button was there because __?
User avatar
alan101
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 2:46 pm

Re: Legal issues - what are the DEFINITIVE laws

Postby Joeblake » Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:17 pm

No, as I said, I've no difficulty with editing per se.

If you make your edit before someone posts in response there's no problem. It's not a question of time. It's when you edit your post after someone has commented on it but fail to draw attention to the edit that's the dishonest action.

Joe
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy
Bertrand Russell
Many people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.
Joeblake
 
Posts: 12697
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Lesmurdie WA

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Bicycles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: VeloGiro



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU



InTouch with BNA
“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter