Me too! well, only one of my bikes is deristricted, the one that has a motor ?. But I do not live in europe (yet). The other bikes are only restricted by some 75% of colestherol at my coronary ?
The end for ebike tuning?
- Thread starter Mikerb
- Start date
Wernher
Active member
What a croc. Firstly the 25km/h limit is insane. Normal bikes exceed that without motors easily so normal bikes may exceed 25km/h but not pedelecs and if you are limited to 25 and you exceed it by pedaling past it you are doing exactly the "crime" that the poor guy on his pedelec is doing. We in South Africa have the 32km/h speed limit like the USA and nobody bothers with derestriction.
Clearly the laws are made by insane idiots who over react to a single incident and now think by bringing into law draconian measures it is going to solve the problem.
What's next? Forcing all bikers to fit speedos on their bikes and putting speed traps up all over the place? Oh no but now somebody comes along on a speed pedelec and suddenly he is allowed to do 45km/h. So what stops me from calling my derestricted pedelec a speed pedelec? I've got to laugh at this burocrasy. Where at other times I might feel sorry for myself living in South Africa where we are quite behind in terms of what bikes are available, suddenly I consider myself extremely lucky. At least we have no laws governing our bikes.
To you poor French people, I suggest stay off the road and tour a lot to other countries.
GrahamPaul
E*POWAH Elite World Champion
I think you misunderstand: the 25km/hr is NOT a speed limit. I regularly exceed 25kph on my eMTB quite legally (and exceed the 40kph Spanish speed limit for ALL bicycles illegally, but that's another story). The 25km/hr is the limit at which motor SUPPORT must cease. It is NOT illegal to pedal past that speed (unless you are in a 10, 15 or 20kph zone!). There is no crime for pedalling past the motor support limit.
Nothing stops you calling your derestricted bike a speed pedelec here in Europe, but you will need plates, insurance and a motorbike style helmet. Oh, and a regular roadworthiness inspection, too.
Wernher
Active member
True, the point however remains. Restricting a pedelec is not going to reduce the speed at which people are riding their bikes and targeting pedelecs because one person was hit and got killed (however tragic that is) is not addressing the issue.
- Thread starter
- #35
.....and the max assisted speed is merely there to differentiate a pedelec fromnother classifications of motorised vehicles.....and as a result exempt pedelecs from the legal requirements that apply to those other classifications. As far as the rider is concerned it means no registration, insurance, lights, helmet regulation. As far as manufacturers are concerned it means no Type Approval is required and that is a very expensive process. So agree with the assisted speed limit or not it hugely benefits us as riders. At least in the UK it also means we are not restricted from areas that otherwise ban all motor vehicles. That includes the majority of Forestry Commission and Forestry England land.
GrahamPaul
E*POWAH Elite World Champion
That's where we'll disagree. As I've said in loads of similar threads, this isn't about the very niche market of EMTBs, this is aimed at eBikes used by commuters in some of the busiest and most congested parts of Europe. You will restrict their speeds and reduce the chances of them bowling over kiddies because the numpties will need to work up a sweat to do it without a motor.
Not sure if this has been already posted, it has more info, I didn't see it in the thread.
France bans illegal eMTB tuning with fines up to € 30,000 | E-MOUNTAINBIKE Magazine
I'm glad no one bothers us in the US.
France bans illegal eMTB tuning with fines up to € 30,000 | E-MOUNTAINBIKE Magazine
I'm glad no one bothers us in the US.
Redbikejohn
Member
A couple of weeks ago I did a 21 mile road bike cycle at an average of 15mph (25kph) and I'm not exactly fast at 57years old. So what are they trying to achieve by limiting ebike assistance? If you are fit and fast it's ok to go over 25kph but if you need some help then no you cant - so suffer baby!
- Thread starter
- #39
Yes...that is where this thread started!
- Thread starter
- #40
That has already been explained! It has absolutely nothing to do with speed but everything to do with creating a category of motorised vehicle that is essentially still a bicycle despite having an engine. The actual max assisted speed was arbitrary but certainly had to be less than a moped. The fact that the EU chose 25kph whilst other authorities chose 30kph demonstrates that point.
Redbikejohn
Member
Yes. It's absurd I agree - the very fact they use a speed to differentiate moped and bicycle, when that speed is clearly below what can be AVERAGED on a bicycle!
- Thread starter
- #42
you are still referring to SPEED. It is motor assisted speed that is regulated, not speed. The margin they had to play with was to stay below Cat 1LE ( moped) which is 45kph ( 30mph in the UK) and a max of 50cc ICE capacity or 4Kw if electric. BUT the moped category is subject to the All European Whole Vehicle Type Approval which regulates every aspect of any model produced. So the decision on max assisted speed was largely to do with how much assistance/power/speed could be considered safe when no part of the bike is subject to Type Approval. A vehicle that is subject to Type Approval would have to have road legal tyres, Braking systems that adhered to a specified standard, crash testing etc etc...….ad the vehicle would have to be tested at specific times to ensure it still complied. So forget the ranges of tyres currently available, forget changing to whatever brakes you fancy....make sure your bike complies at all times.....lights, mudguards, reflectors. The ramifications go on and on!!
Wernher
Active member
I'm 100% okay with a limit. What I'm saying is that the silly 25km/h limit is what makes people derestrict their bikes. My bike has a 32 km/h limit and I will never consider changing it. Most people I know are in agreement with that. If the regulators look at this they'll understand that they are not addressing the issue from a logical perspective because speed pedelecs are faster and a greater danger. The fact that they have other legal requirements is neither here nor there. Then another issue is why pedestrians and bicycles are hitting each other. A person being bit by a speeding eBiker or bicycle or motorbike or car is still a pedestrian that gets hit by a vehicle. Road eBikes pedal so light that assistance to 32 will make no difference. If you don't believe me ride your bike at 32 vs 25. It's not about going faster. It's about that feeling of almost being braked as you got 25. Obviously you haven't ridden an eMtb with a legal 32 km/h limit. I can tell you that if you had you will know that regardless of make it model you'll feel that it reaches its limit speed much more naturally than those limited to 25. I know because I've turn both and particularly the same model before and after the change was applied.
Anyway. I'm not going to get in an argument about something that's not my problem. We don't have that issue. All in saying is if the restriction was more realistic the running wouldn't be such a big business as it is. We've seen that in South Africa and those who still went ahead and applied speed lifting kit to their bikes eventually removed it because they realised it only eats more battery with no benefit.
Last edited:
The authorities need a clear legal demarcation between mopeds and ebikes as has been explained above. I’d prefer 30kmh too, but in reality it’s highly unlikely to change now - where is the value proposition for the regulators? It’s not much of a vote winner...
Another (more cynical) factor is that if ebikes had a higher assistance limit lots of people would move to them from mopeds, and that would mean a whole lot less revenue in tax - less VAT at the initial sale, no petrol duty, VED, insurance tax... the list goes on. Not really in their interests, at least until they identify something else to tax to make up the difference!
Another (more cynical) factor is that if ebikes had a higher assistance limit lots of people would move to them from mopeds, and that would mean a whole lot less revenue in tax - less VAT at the initial sale, no petrol duty, VED, insurance tax... the list goes on. Not really in their interests, at least until they identify something else to tax to make up the difference!
Last edited:
GrahamPaul
E*POWAH Elite World Champion
Not a good direction to come from to support your argument.
The impact energy is related to the kinetic energy of the object (bike) at instant of impact.
The kinetic energy of an object is proportional to the square of the velocity.
25² = 625
32² = 1024
What you have demonstrated is that by increasing the maximum speed by 7km/hr, you have increased the impact energy by 64%.
eBikes are heavier than non-e bikes. A tough negotiator could use the above argument as a convincing reason to put a maximum speed limit on powered bikes. Be very careful!
Rusty
E*POWAH BOSS
Personally I don't think derestricting would be an issue if the limits were somewhat relevant.
The American 32kph, while not perfect (most riders I talk to say 36kph would be excellent) is a whole lot better than the 25kph the nanny EU has foisted on you lot. To be fair, I would not even bother with an eMTB if I was restricted to 25kph.
When it comes to speeds on the road however that again is very different. I used to do a 30-100km loops (fairly flattish) on my road bike and averaged 30-32kph. On my 29er Singlespeed on the same loop I average 28-29kph. That is average and nowhere near max. On those loops just about any day of the week I would be passed by solo riders doing 5-10kph faster, small groups 10-15kph faster and bunches 20kph+ faster (consider I was 50+ and overweight - now 60+). Talking to one of my bosses who is German - he reckons his commute speed back home was mid 30's and up. Me, I think this limit is just a case of some Nazi in Brussels demonstrating pent up frustration that he/she can barely do 20kph and not wanting anyone to have any enjoyment.
Wernher
Active member
And your point is? If my bike is limited to 25 and I ride it at 40 by pedaling it past 25? The impact at 32 or 40 is the same whether I have restricted the bike or not.
What I say though is if the speed limit was more realistic as in most countries outside Europe the need for derestriction will fall away. We've seen that first hand here locally.
I'm not in favour of derestriction and most of the time I ride my bike in Eco mode at the lowest setting and I am 63 going on 64.
I am however pointing out the obvious that if you make restrictions too ridiculous you create reasons why people start rebelling against it. The truth is that some of the derestriction that is done on bikes can not be picked up except by riding it or using sofisticated software, so if a regulator wants to test it they'll have to physically go and ride your bike or you can claim that you've ridden it at that speed under your own power. If your ride a US specced bike from any of the manufacturers in Europe it will support up to 32 kilometers and it has no derestriction software or dongles installed.
How do you police it? If you really want to you can impound all bikes that have been involved in hitting pedestrians and then test it. But here's the thing. How many pedestrians actually get hit?
So I'm going to leave you now with your silly 25 km/h speed limit which you are obviously happy with and defending with your life. And I'm going to look at how you're going to have the same news of eBikes and normal bikes hitting and killing pedestrians every time a person walks in front of a bike and gets injured or killed. The debate will rage on and then the authorities are going to start taking about banning bikes in city centres and so it will continue. Enforcing a speed limit to an unrealistic number to classify a certain type of bike while you're not limiting it's actual speed and still allowing normal bikes under human power to exceed that speed without any penalties is simply insane and beggars believe. You're telling me that speed is not the issue and go into long arguments about what an extra 7km/h does to the impact on a human being and then you tell me it's not about speed and that I'm missing the point. Huh? So why then your 7km/h argument?
You see a good defender will always trump the prosecutor who argued like that because it makes no sense.
So if you want to restrict speeds which is really what you want to do if you apply a speed limit on eBikes, you have to limit it on all bikes which means you have to fit speedometers as you can't expect a person to guess how fast he's going.
You're opening a can of worms here because what do you restrict next the pace at which people jog?
Start by providing dedicated cycling roads and stop arguing about a silly unrealistic speed limits that you can't control and that realistically is not statistically a real issue but an issue that's been escalated out of proportion.
In the UK a delivery biker has been found guilty of killing a pedestrian because he rode a bike without brakes at high speed. I agree with that verdict. He did something where he should have foreseen that his actions might have an impact with dire consequences.
Personally I believe mountain bikes belong on trails and that's where I ride mine except where I ride to a trail or between trails.
If a society needs to be policed so much that every actions is regulated it has become a really sad place and says very little of its moral fibre. What happened to people taking responsibility for their actions?
By all means, if a person rides recklessly and endangers other people, pull him off and sort him out but you have not convinced me that there is any realistic argument for a 25 km/h speed limit.
Wernher
Active member
Agreed.
The 25kph limit is not a random number picked by clueless people.
The pedelec was created to make the bike a more compelling option to a car, while still being suitable for shared infrastructure. It's easy chosing the ebike for a commute when you can ride in normal clothes and you don't need a shower when arriving at work. No type approval makes the bike cheaper to buy and no insurance makes it cheaper to own. This makes the pedelec a low threshold option to the car.
To have a motorized vehicle exempt from the usual requirements like type approval, license and insurance, it will need to be a very mildly motorized vehicle. And it needs to be mild to get access to shared- and bike infrastructure. Several contries in Europe design this infrastructure for speeds up to 25kph. Obviously, if the ebike assists at speeds over 25kph it's very hard to argue it should be allowed on these paths.
There's lots of research from different European countries showing the pedelec has an average travel speed pretty close to a regular bike. The result usually is about 2kph higher for the pedelec. This shows the 25kph limit ensures the pedelec impacts it's surroundings like a regular bike.
But we ride on the trails, surely we can ride faster there you say? That would make the emtb illegal to ride on the roads to and from the trails. And a lot of places the trails are shared too. Why would the other trail users understand and accept that we need faster bikes?
Why do the US have a 32kph limit then? Well, I haven't looked much into that. As far as I know, they don't have the same bike infrastructure that we do in Europe. There are people arguing it should be 25kph in the US too.
Derestricting emtbs is highly undermining the work that is done to allow the ebike on trails. I know, I've worked quite a bit for trail access.
The pedelec was created to make the bike a more compelling option to a car, while still being suitable for shared infrastructure. It's easy chosing the ebike for a commute when you can ride in normal clothes and you don't need a shower when arriving at work. No type approval makes the bike cheaper to buy and no insurance makes it cheaper to own. This makes the pedelec a low threshold option to the car.
To have a motorized vehicle exempt from the usual requirements like type approval, license and insurance, it will need to be a very mildly motorized vehicle. And it needs to be mild to get access to shared- and bike infrastructure. Several contries in Europe design this infrastructure for speeds up to 25kph. Obviously, if the ebike assists at speeds over 25kph it's very hard to argue it should be allowed on these paths.
There's lots of research from different European countries showing the pedelec has an average travel speed pretty close to a regular bike. The result usually is about 2kph higher for the pedelec. This shows the 25kph limit ensures the pedelec impacts it's surroundings like a regular bike.
But we ride on the trails, surely we can ride faster there you say? That would make the emtb illegal to ride on the roads to and from the trails. And a lot of places the trails are shared too. Why would the other trail users understand and accept that we need faster bikes?
Why do the US have a 32kph limit then? Well, I haven't looked much into that. As far as I know, they don't have the same bike infrastructure that we do in Europe. There are people arguing it should be 25kph in the US too.
Derestricting emtbs is highly undermining the work that is done to allow the ebike on trails. I know, I've worked quite a bit for trail access.
Pdoz
E*POWAH Elite World Champion
Given a choice between a 25 l assist limit and universal access to mtb - I like the 25 k likit
Jopodriver
New Member
Wouldn't it be enough if people would only ride at 25km/h speed on public roads, regardless how fast their bikes can go? If they go faster, they would be fined.
Cars can go much faster than the allowed speed limit, but they are still not limited to it.
CjP
PRIME TIME
While I think 25km restriction is rediculous, I am forever grateful that (in Australia and a Europe) I can ride my ebike where ever I like!
I would rather have the freedom to ride my bike with assistance up to 25km than to have to ride a non assigned bike.
Be great full people!
I would rather have the freedom to ride my bike with assistance up to 25km than to have to ride a non assigned bike.
Be great full people!
Yet. It’s only a matter of time before this happens for climate and safety reasons. It’s only a powerful industry lobby that has prevented this thus far. The cycling industry doesn’t have that.
However I believe in time the change in transportation that’s required for net zero means that we might have to more favourably reconsider ebike regulation. This could be a very positive thing if done embracing the possibilities.
Jopodriver
New Member
I don't think it's only a powerful industry lobby that has prevented cars from limiting their maximum speeds. I think it's also because vast majority of users of cars are opposed to the limit.
It's also good for safety if a car can go past the speed limit in emergency situations or situations where they can avoid a crash by going faster temporarily.
I am sure there would be grounds to follow similar rules with e-bikes. People would just need to respect the speed limit, regardless of how fast their bikes can theoretically go. Most people that drive cars follow speed limits, and I am sure e-bikers are not different in this regard. In my opinion, artificial limits to maximum speeds are not the way to go with e-bikes.
Rusty
E*POWAH BOSS
Exactly. The random restriction figures are something some so-called Expert came up with.
Completely arbitrary and in my mind unrealistic - just like limiting an automobile to whatever speed limit your country has.
I think there are far better ways to spend tax payers money than putting up speed limit signs and use police resources to enforce them. I find it hard to believe the rest of the society will accept this just because a few people are bothered by the restriction on their ebikes. I think it's a good thing the pedelec has been accepte by the society and the limiter is a small price to pay.
Rusty
E*POWAH BOSS
That attitude is why our lives are being restricted in so many other areas and we are forced to live with completely unreasonable BS.
I was always told by my grandad that if something is arbitrary and wrong one should fight for what you believe in. Rolling over and accepting whatever crap is thrown at you from above is why things are so crappy today and why in history we had things like Nazi Germany.
I think you may be confused when comparing assisted bikes to non assisted bikes. Neither are restricted to a 25kmh speed limit. The ebike just stops assisting after 25kmh, and you can still pedal and go faster. If you have say a Levo with the Brose motor, there is no measurable resistance from the motor once the power cuts out at 25kmh. As for other brands... well, you still have to spin a in powered motor ?
Despite agreeing strongly that protest is critically important in society, I think there are much bigger things to fight against. However, as it happens I think the opportunity to rethink all our transportation is upon us.
If the infrastructure assumption for ebikes was EU-wide 25kph bike lanes then what happens when most road traffic is ebikes. Time to rethink?
And you know as soon as someone invokes Nazi Germany in a conversation as trivial as this the conversation is over/argument lost right?
Rusty
E*POWAH BOSS
Nope. I had family fighting on both sides and the one thing my elders constantly hammered into me as a child was to stand up for what I believe in. If people did that our world would be a vastly different place - and by standing up for what you believe in, that is NOT the bullshit the greenies and the left are currently doing that involves destruction of property, but constructing well thought out arguments, engaging with your area and letting those that are elected know that they are YOUR employees and unless they work for their constituents they are on borrowed time.
Sadly, the EU is a completely undemocratic body that needs to be squashed ASAP.
I do feel however that the damage is already done and we can only hope that Brexit leads to other countries pulling the plug on that bloated beauracracy.
