DJI Just Unlocked 1000W. What Now?

[Tadmcmichael]

I think the Specialized class 3 thing is a bigger threat to trail access. Practically speaking, I don’t think riders will be able to go much faster than 20 mph off-road with the Levo since it cuts power. But we lose the narrative by saying “it’s Class 1, but it can be Class 3 on the road.” Specialized should rethink this strategy.

 

[timo2824]

In the USA, I believe class 1 e-bikes are limited to 750w max already. I figured that's why the industry went with that number. Anything above that would be illegal on most MTB trails, except Arkansas!

 

[DirkWisely]

In the USA, I believe class 1 e-bikes are limited to 750w max already. I figured that's why the industry went with that number. Anything above that would be illegal on most MTB trails, except Arkansas!

I asked ChatGPT, and it even linked me to the legislation.

For the purpose of this section, the term “low-speed electric bicycle” means a two- or three-wheeled vehicle with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 h.p.), whose maximum speed on a paved level surface, when powered solely by such a motor while ridden by an operator who weighs 170 pounds, is less than 20 mph.

DJI is rated for 250w just like the Bosch. The US legislation doesn't given a hoot about peak power, just nominal.

 

[xtraman122]

I asked ChatGPT, and it even linked me to the legislation.



DJI is rated for 250w just like the Bosch. The US legislation doesn't given a hoot about peak power, just nominal.

Where does it say nominal vs peak? I’d argue that could be interpreted either way. Everywhere I’ve heard it referenced people seem to refer to the US limit of 750 more like a peak number. Manufacturers seem to have interpreted that way as well. It’s really just the silly EU regulation with “nominal” 250w that everyone has blown past because at that peak power level nobody would even enjoy these bikes much.

 

[DirkWisely]

Where does it say nominal vs peak? I’d argue that could be interpreted either way. Everywhere I’ve heard it referenced people seem to refer to the US limit of 750 more like a peak number. Manufacturers seem to have interpreted that way as well. It’s really just the silly EU regulation with “nominal” 250w that everyone has blown past because at that peak power level nobody would even enjoy these bikes much.

2. Industry and Manufacturer Practice​

Manufacturers operating in the U.S. consistently treat the 750W as a nominal power ceiling:

• Specialized, Trek, Rad Power Bikes, Bafang, Bosch, etc. rate their motors as:
  • 250W nominal for European-compliant models (e.g., Bosch, Shimano).
  • 500W to 750W nominal for U.S.-focused models (e.g., Rad Power, Bafang).
• Many of these motors deliver much higher peak power—sometimes exceeding 1000W—but still comply legally as long as the nominal rating stays under 750W.
  

TL;DR:​

The 750W U.S. e-bike motor limit is best understood as a nominal (continuous) power rating, not peak.
This interpretation is consistent with:

• Engineering standards,
• Industry practice,
• International harmonization (like with 250W EU motors), and
• Regulatory logic aimed at meaningful consumer protections.

 

[timo2824]

2. Industry and Manufacturer Practice​

Manufacturers operating in the U.S. consistently treat the 750W as a nominal power ceiling:

• Specialized, Trek, Rad Power Bikes, Bafang, Bosch, etc.rate their motors as:
  • 250W nominal for European-compliant models (e.g., Bosch, Shimano).
  • 500W to 750W nominal for U.S.-focused models (e.g., Rad Power, Bafang).
• Many of these motors deliver much higher peak power—sometimes exceeding 1000W—but still comply legally as long as the nominal rating stays under 750W.

TL;DR:​

The 750W U.S. e-bike motor limit is best understood as a nominal (continuous) power rating, not peak.
This interpretation is consistent with:

• Engineering standards,
• Industry practice,
• International harmonization (like with 250W EU motors), and
• Regulatory logic aimed at meaningful consumer protections.

Then the manufacturers need to stop saying the peak watts and just say the nominal then. That'll stop all this BS right now, the most powerful motor currently is 250 watts, no one is close to the limit.

 

[DirkWisely]

Then the manufacturers need to stop saying the peak watts and just say the nominal then. That'll stop all this BS right now, the most powerful motor currently is 250 watts, no one is close to the limit.

Eh, peak watts still matters. A short burst of 1000w to clear some crazy uphill is still useful, even if the motor is rated for only 250w nominal.
I agree though that they'd draw less attention from regulators and anti-emtb activists if they just stated 250w nominal. Of course, then they'd be drawing less attention from consumers too.

 

[luna87824]

I think the Specialized class 3 thing is a bigger threat to trail access. Practically speaking, I don’t think riders will be able to go much faster than 20 mph off-road with the Levo since it cuts power. But we lose the narrative by saying “it’s Class 1, but it can be Class 3 on the road.” Specialized should rethink this strategy.

How many class 3 and/or unrestricted bikes on the trails have you seen causing problems?

 

[DirkWisely]

How many class 3 and/or unrestricted bikes on the trails have you seen causing problems?

Will probably see a lot more now that it's built into the most popular e-bike.

 

[Plummet]

Isn't this a legislation issue not a manufacturers issue. Surely governments will legislate max wattage, nm and kph. The the bike companies set the power and speed limits per country.

Ps I don't want more power, that uses more battery and I get less range or a heavier bike with bigger battery.

85nm/600 is enough for me but I'll play with the 100nm 750w when it's released. Currently I use boost 10% of the time so not using my current max output much.

 

[Biano44]

How many class 3 and/or unrestricted bikes on the trails have you seen causing problems?

Probably the same amount as class 1 restricted bikes to be fair.

 

[irie]

The ‘industry’ will take us there if we’re not careful, and we’re going to let them…

This ^^^

New entrants just want to make profits and unsurprisingly don't care about how they do it - they have nothing to lose so why would they? But they must be stopped from thus forcing blanket regulation on so far unregulated eMTB's.

 

[xtraman122]

2. Industry and Manufacturer Practice​

Manufacturers operating in the U.S. consistently treat the 750W as a nominal power ceiling:

• Specialized, Trek, Rad Power Bikes, Bafang, Bosch, etc.rate their motors as:
  • 250W nominal for European-compliant models (e.g., Bosch, Shimano).
  • 500W to 750W nominal for U.S.-focused models (e.g., Rad Power, Bafang).
• Many of these motors deliver much higher peak power—sometimes exceeding 1000W—but still comply legally as long as the nominal rating stays under 750W.

TL;DR:​

The 750W U.S. e-bike motor limit is best understood as a nominal (continuous) power rating, not peak.
This interpretation is consistent with:

• Engineering standards,
• Industry practice,
• International harmonization (like with 250W EU motors), and
• Regulatory logic aimed at meaningful consumer protections.

Is that AI generated? Weird because the Bosch, Spesh, and Shimano motors do not peak above the stated 1000w, and very interested that they'd rate the same exact bike as 250w in one market and 750w in another. As someone explained the way the nominal ratings are set, there should just be one nominal rating for a given motor, and cutting it to 1/3 of that in one market is just bizarre.

Just goes to show how nonsensical the whole idea of a nominal rating is for the intent of limiting these bikes. It should clearly just be based on peak output if the goal is to somehow limit the speed/power of these bikes. Someone could theoretically have a motor peak at 2.5Kw for a max of 30 seconds and have it be ridiculously overpowered (And surely be squarely in the category of what they're trying to restrict these bikes from becoming) and still be rated 250w nominally if they want. Clearly nominal is useless if a motor putting out 1000w (DJI) can be rated both 250w (In the EU) and 750w (In the US).

 

[RickBullotta]

I wonder if anti-drone technology will be equally effective against 1000 watt eMTBs and SurRons...

 

[DirkWisely]

Is that AI generated? Weird because the Bosch, Spesh, and Shimano motors do not peak above the stated 1000w, and very interested that they'd rate the same exact bike as 250w in one market and 750w in another. As someone explained the way the nominal ratings are set, there should just be one nominal rating for a given motor, and cutting it to 1/3 of that in one market is just bizarre.

It is, but I checked the relevant numbers. You might want to re-read, because it is clearly referring to Bafang and Rad Power when talking about exceeding 1000w.

Just goes to show how nonsensical the whole idea of a nominal rating is for the intent of limiting these bikes. It should clearly just be based on peak output if the goal is to somehow limit the speed/power of these bikes. Someone could theoretically have a motor peak at 2.5Kw for a max of 30 seconds and have it be ridiculously overpowered (And surely be squarely in the category of what they're trying to restrict these bikes from becoming) and still be rated 250w nominally if they want. Clearly nominal is useless if a motor putting out 1000w (DJI) can be rated both 250w (In the EU) and 750w (In the US).

I agree nominal is clearly a bad metric. Personally my preference would be to cap assist ratio, rather than peak power. That way bigger dudes that generate more power can get more power out of it.

 

[DirkWisely]

I wonder if anti-drone technology will be equally effective against 1000 watt eMTBs and SurRons...

It's pretty stupid to mention a 1000w in the same breath as a SurRon. It's the type of thing anti-ebike activists do. A 1000w motor is 25% more powerful than the most popular e-bike motors. A SurRon is like 12-18x more powerful than an Avinox.

 

[Biano44]

This ^^^

New entrants just want to make profits and unsurprisingly don't care about how they do it - they have nothing to lose so why would they? But they must be stopped from thus forcing blanket regulation on so far unregulated eMTB's.

But they are regulated and all E-bike motor manufacturers want to make money.
Plus, as far as I can tell, the people who make the regulations have said nothing, it’s the manufacturers who want to “fix” them before the authorities swipe in.
In the EU at least, there are no ‘Peak’ power rules, therefore no one is breaking the rules.

The real problem is not power. The bikes will do the same amount of damage to trails using the same tyres with a 75kg - 100kg rider with or without the extra power of a DJI.
Especially if said E-MTB is unrestricted.
And, as far as I can tell, this seems to be Bosch motivated, little has come from Brose or any other brand.
Specialized for one, don’t seem to care, just look at that Class 3 trick. That’s a bigger problem I would have thought.

 

[irie]

But they are regulated and all E-bike motor manufacturers want to make money.
Plus, as far as I can tell, the people who make the regulations have said nothing, it’s the manufacturers who to “fix” them before the authorities swipe in.
In the EU at least, there are no ‘Peak’ power rules, therefore no one is breaking the rules.

The real problem is not power. The bikes will do the same amount of damage to trails using the same tyres with a 75kg - 100kg rider with or without the extra power of a DJI.
Especially if said E-MTB is unrestricted.
And, as far as I can tell, this seems to be Bosch motivated, little has come from Brose or any other brand.
Specialized for one, don’t seem to care, just look at that Class 3 trick. That’s a bigger problem I would have thought.

They are regulated in the sense that they allowed to avoid formal regulation.

It's the formal regulation that leads to licencing, insurance, and all the rest of it.

 

[Biano44]

They are regulated in the sense that they allowed to avoid formal regulation.

It's the formal regulation that leads to licencing, insurance, and all the rest of it.

No. That is class 3 e-bikes that are already regulated, at least in the UK and I assume the EU.

 

[irie]

No. That is class 3 e-bikes that are already regulated, at least in the UK and I assume the EU.

It is this regulation which must be avoided for currently unregulated bikes.

 

[DirkWisely]

It is this regulation which must be avoided for currently unregulated bikes.

They are regulated. There are rules they must follow to remain in a class as defined by regulation.

Regulation doesn't mean they need a registration or license.

 

[Stephen B]

What I want is a DJI technology motor that is half the weight and delivers half the power.

 

[irie]

They are regulated. There are rules they must follow to remain in a class as defined by regulation.

Regulation doesn't mean they need a registration or license.

I'm in the UK.

 

[Bikedriver19]

Maybe I should have this, in this thread. The "class' is a bunch of BS.





"Yeah, the Think tank said "oh shit" ... lets make a law to kick DJI out of the market, by limiting to 750 watts .
WE can decide, what is "enough" for YOU.
This is completely ridiculous.

Dear ebike Market - I realize, you just got an ass kicking, but come on now. Get back up on your feet and fight, instead of reducing the capabilities of your opponent, to make it a "fair fight" . (That's bullshit) See how DJI just released a firmware update to in response .... near 1000 watts now on turbo.,.. that's an F**K You, to your "self imposed cap" DJI isn't standing down, and I don't blame them.

Power Limits (and laws) are meaningless, unless they can be enforced. In some places, this is no problem, but in others, it is...doesn't matter what the law is where I ride most often. A lot of the trails I ride are illegally frequented by MX riders, surons, etc....but the trail network is so big, no one cares, and good luck with enforcement, there is simply no chance.
There is plenty of space and trails, for all. But I think in some places, there definitely should be speed limits, power limits perhaps,...too many riders and people on the trails, for such machines. .... but NOT in all places and definitely not on private land.

What really gets me, is that Ya can't really tell people what to Buy and ride on private land, or how much power they can have on the trails MX riders use, right? (often Legal or not in some places)

I think High power motors never went anywhere historically due to size & weight...that and the battery. Remember those Bionix wheels....and the batteries are getting better.

But all this talk about Power "ratings" and limits is so interesting, (but maybe not well understood).

So Like How does a 250 watt "rated" motor, put out 750 watts continuously with a firmware update,
and does the DJI > 1000 watts peak?
What does "nominal" and "rating" mean, exactly?

Well, It could mean a lot of things, depending on heat dissipation, voltage applied, efficiency,...etc

The same motor can have multiple "ratings" and "nominal" or continuous is a suggestion with defined variables, not a technical limit.

And on top of that, motors and motor technology is all different, a motor just isn't "a motor" ...very little standardization for part of the industry, the motor manufacturer is basically the one defining what is "nominal" ...at some voltage applied, at some speed and torque... and that can be whatever they want it to be, .....until just before the copper in the motor winding starts to melt from thermal overload. Then you are screwed, and the motor is toast.

I see some testing at the wheel...which is the right way to look at the total output of the system, not just the motor.

So what if we say "Motors can only be 750 watts"
What about the efficiency of the gearing? So the same motor, with 2 different gear systems with different efficiencies, have 2 different outputs of power, at the end of the day, at the wheel.
What about heat dissipation...is this "rating" just in air, or mounted to some heat sink path?
What about .....a lot of things.
Changes things. See electric Motor "Ratings" can be "FUZZY" outside of hard mechanical and thermal limits, and even these things can change, especially with temperature.

So where is that STUPID 750 watt limit, "line in the dirt," the industry is taking about (to kick DJI out)?
Kung foo, my ass. DJI knows, some serious Kung fu, and it's got nothing to do with Greed. It all has to do, with FUN.

Is the power limit, On the motor output or the system output? And what motor are you talking about, what kind, what voltage applied, what speed and torque, what type of control, what are they calling "nominal,. and peak.

The power lines are curves, and peaks are relatively short, because as the motor heats up, the current needs to be reduced. That's why a motor might put out "peaks" of 750 watts...but that is not really continuous, it needs to cool down. Continuous means it can run at that point, 24 hours a day, which can be anything below the point at which it starts to fail.

True Peak power is pretty straight forward, can be defined for any motor, and will often NOT be limited by the motor, but rather the controller's currrent output capability. The actual intermittent peak power a motor can provide, is a function of the time it is provided. Higher power = less time at that power.

For example, the "peak," near stall torque of electric motors, is often massively higher than the nominal rating, depending on the type, and this also is a direct function of voltage applied. Simply Ohms Law, V = IR. Higher V for a given R, means higher I is possible, and vice versa. ...but if you get near true Peak torque of a motor....you've only got in the range of seconds of time, the motor is hot as hell, and the efficiency is terrible.

Now if you take all of this into account, and think about the fact, that I can hit the BOOST button on the DJI, and it will put out "peaks" of near 1000 watts (or whatever) for 30 seconds...and then I can hit it again, and again, and again....and again......Oh wait, I can hit it again..

This tells me that the true continuous capability (not "rating ") of the DJI is impressive.

With repeated boosts, I feel it pulling back a bit, but not much and again, Peak or intermittent capability, is most often defined in seconds, not minutes....if it was really near its "Peak"

Love seeing the change, but Yes, higher power is not for all riders, in all places.

Now if the battery could just get 5 lbs lighter, and provide 2000 wH.....man, that would be another new world.

I personally think about 1000 - 1500 watts peak, will end up the typical max in the future, for e bikes. After that, might as well not pedal, and get on a suron, etc.
Even though the BOOST is cool, I really never feel like I need it or crave it on the trails, unless I am passing my buddies riding anything else, uphill...that's fun.

 

[Fangs2k]

Power Limits (and laws) are meaningless, unless they can be enforced.

The problem is, no serious/credible manufacturer will be making stuff that doesn’t comply with the laws/regulations anyway so the point is somewhat moot.

Nobody is trying to tell anybody what to ride on private land, fill yer boots.

Maybe where you live trails are ‘massive’ and it’s isn’t a problem, but that’s not the case everywhere in the world.

I love emtbs, but I’m not loving what some want them to become, especially if that ends with me being kicked off the trails I love to ride legally.

That’s the issue for me, right there.

 

[Bikedriver19]

The problem is, no serious/credible manufacturer will be making stuff that doesn’t comply with the laws/regulations anyway so the point is somewhat moot.

Nobody is trying to tell anybody what to ride on private land, fill yer boots.

Maybe where you live trails are ‘massive’ and it’s isn’t a problem, but that’s not the case everywhere in the world.

I love emtbs, but I’m not loving what some want them to become, especially if that ends with me being kicked off the trails I love to ride legally.

That’s the issue for me, right there.

well then, you have to enforce and obey the laws, based on where you are , and mostly,,... just use common sense, if you going to ride, such machines.

But no one should dictate what people that don't have that problem, what to do, or ride. And neither should the industry.

DJI is damn tech credible, BTW, obviously, and seems they are OK to go it, on their own.

 

[irie]

well then, you have to enforce and obey the laws, based on where you are , and mostly,,... just use common sense, if you going to ride, such machines.

But no one should dictate what people that don't have that problem, what to do, or ride. And neither should the industry.

DJI is damn tech credible, BTW, obviously, and seems they are OK to go it, on their own.

You are in the USA where you appear to be advocating a free for all then see what the end result is, your call of course.

However, in the UK the situation is very different where a free for all would very likely result in us no longer being allowed to ride on the huge network of "Bridleways".

"In total there are over 76,000 separate bridleway routes with a total length of over 25,000 miles in England and Wales."

"cyclists have the legal right to use bridleways, but they must give way to pedestrians and those on horseback. This right is established by Section 30 of the Countryside Act 1968. While cycling on bridleways is permitted, it's crucial to be aware of local regulations and byelaws, as these can impact the use of bridleways."

Bridle path - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In the UK eMTB riders are currently classed as 'cyclists'.

 

[JohnR]

Classes, speed and power limits are yesterday's problems. Geofencing is our enemy now.

From California: Analyzing the Potential of Geofencing for Electric Bicycles and Scooters in the Public Right of Way (Link to cal dot gov)

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is investigating whether geofencing could be used to:

• Prevent e-bikes and e-scooters from entering access-controlled highways and other specified locations.
• Limit the devices’ maximum speed in certain areas, allowing access to some bike paths and cycle tracks where they typically would not be allowed.
• Provide designated parking areas for scooters so they are less likely to be left in the public right of way.

Agencies With Geofencing Experience Five local jurisdictions reported having experience with geofencing to control e-bike and e-scooter use:

California
• City of San Diego.
• Los Angeles Department of Transportation.

Colorado
• Denver Public Works.
• City of Fort Collins.

Oregon
• Portland Bureau of Transportation. (Note: While not included in the survey's distribution list, this agency and another local agency in Oregon (City of Eugene) completed the survey.)

BMW and GM have been working on geofencing for years.

No wonder geofencing plays such a “central role” in these AMBY concepts: BMW already has everything it needs to make it a reality for e-bikes.
A geofencing solution that caps power delivery to S-pedelec pedals within the city limits would put these fast e-bikes back onto the protected bike paths where they belong. It would also help drive the adoption of S-pedelecs as great alternatives to cars for long commutes to and from the city. And that, in turn, would help European cities achieve their environmental goals that led to the creation of these low emission zones in the first place. (Link to The Verge article)

Neuron Ebikes Australia, UK, Canada:

Neuron e-bikes can generally be ridden up to 25km/h. However, there are some areas marked as Low Speed Zones and they will slow the maximum speed down, generally to 15km/h. These Low Speed Zones are visible on the map on the home screen of the Neuron app.

We recommend familiarising yourself with our Geofences before starting your ride and planning your journey accordingly. You can find out more about Geofences here.

Please remember to always slow down and give way to pedestrians. On shared paths you should keep to the left and sound your bell when passing pedestrians. Please refer to our Riding Rules for more information.

EU Urban Mobility Observatory

The list of things to read about ebike geofencing seems endless. The technology is already available and in some ebikes it is already resident for anti-theft features, as shown in the YT short below.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

I would rather the industry self regulate than have geo fencing force it.

 

[Bikedriver19]

You are in the USA where you appear to be advocating a free for all then see what the end result is, your call of course.

However, in the UK the situation is very different where a free for all would very likely result in us no longer being allowed to ride on the huge network of "Bridleways".

"In total there are over 76,000 separate bridleway routes with a total length of over 25,000 miles in England and Wales."

"cyclists have the legal right to use bridleways, but they must give way to pedestrians and those on horseback. This right is established by Section 30 of the Countryside Act 1968. While cycling on bridleways is permitted, it's crucial to be aware of local regulations and byelaws, as these can impact the use of bridleways."

Bridle path - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In the UK eMTB riders are currently classed as 'cyclists'.

Yeah, I know, I've spend a lot of time in Europe. That's, why I say, there should be some limitations in some places, but not all.

Hey Irie, come on over here, in my neck of the woods , it's all different. I am just saying, you shouldn't have a "limitation" for those people and those places that don't want or need one, and I agree with you,... you should have one for those people and places, that do.

Cheers

 

[HandsomeDanNZ]

I still don't understand why everyone is so fixated on eBikes, when (here in NZ, at least) a 16 year old driver on their learner's licence can just as easily get behind the wheel of a hypercar with 100's of KW of power and 1000's of NM of torque, as they can a small, efficient low-powered runabout that barely outpaces me on foot.

It's like the pearl-clutchers (particularly in the US where they want to preserve their trail "purity") are looking at the new thing (like they did with eScooters in NZ and the UK when they started popping up pre-COVID) and trying to have their say when they aren't directly involved in the sport.

Speed isn't an issue - I've clocked well over 80kmh on a road when I was road racing and have clocked over 60kmh on an MTB at a DH park. And I fell off at those speeds too, so understand the consequences.
How fast do I generally go uphill? 15-20kmh at most. I am old and fat and lazy. I have XC riders blast past me on uphills as I heave and wheeze up the trails.
How would a higher-powered eBike change that? Without a throttle, probably not a whole lot on a normal day, but technical climbing might be easier.