Authorities are waking up...

[pagheca]

As many of us I have been involved in several forum since the beginning of the internet. I also don't use socials like FB, X etc.

I also left most fora and maintained just two or three along the years, and came to a conclusion: that the difference is in MODERATION. If moderation is REALLY, and I mean REALLY, strict, annoying people get soon somewhere else and fights die. If not it soon attract provocative, arrogant and stupid peope while others go. I have no problems being censored myself (including this message of mine if required!).

I understand that you may loose some visibility but IF I was a moderator here I would remove most of this thread and of many others, leaving only technical and funny posts.

I already wrote to moderation about my humble opinion on the matter but eventually they prefer quantity to quality. I used the ignore option instead.

No problems, up to them. Once again this is only the humble opinion of just on participant.

 

[skizzian]

Considering the threats of legal exposure, it sounds to me like manufacturers might want to stop importing ebikes into Italy. Thats how at least one firearms manufacturer I know treats radical leftist states like New York, California, New Jersey, etc.. When I used to live up there, I had to go to Pennsylvania to source the particular high-end brand of rifle I wanted. So nice to live in Arizona now where I’m not committing a felony for simply having hollow points in my EDC.

what are the dum-dums for?
hunting big game?

 

[tyrolrider]

Translation to English

CONFINDUSTRIA ANCMA
National Association of Bicycles, Motorcycles and Accessories
Milan, 28 May 2026

Subject: Sale of Non-Compliant Pedal-Assist Bicycles – Updates and Risks

Dear Retailer,

We would like to draw your attention to the issue of marketing and selling pedal-assist bicycles (“e-bikes”) that do not comply with current regulations, a matter that has recently been the focus of investigations and initiatives at both the industry association and institutional levels.

In recent months, ANCMA has undertaken specific legal and institutional initiatives, including formal inquiries to the relevant authorities (the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Made in Italy), aimed at clarifying the applicable regulatory framework and promoting stronger market surveillance activities.

The issue of non-compliant e-bikes was also featured on the television programme "Mi Manda Rai3", broadcast on 7 March 2026.

In this context, we wish to highlight the following:

• Current legislation clearly defines the technical characteristics an e-bike must possess in order to be legally classified as such.
• The sale of non-compliant products (for example, regarding power output, operating modes, or pedal-assistance systems) exposes not only manufacturers but also retailers to significant liability, including administrative sanctions and, in some cases, criminal responsibility.
• Monitoring and enforcement activities are currently underway and are expected to intensify further, driven by industry associations and involving the relevant authorities.

In light of the above, we invite you to:

• Carefully verify the compliance of all products you sell.
• Request appropriate technical documentation and declarations of conformity from suppliers.
• Refrain from selling products where there are doubts regarding compliance with applicable regulations.

It should also be noted that the market itself is becoming increasingly aware of this issue and is developing widespread methods for reporting irregular situations, resulting in greater exposure to risk for non-compliant operators.

This communication is intended for informational and preventive purposes, with the aim of protecting compliant businesses and helping to combat the problem of illegal e-bikes at its source.

We remain available should you require any further clarification.

Yours sincerely,

CONFINDUSTRIA ANCMA (Italian National Association of Bicycles, Motorcycles and Accessories)

Alex,

why are you posting such content here w/o the Context?

I think it’s important to separate legal EMTBs from illegal electric motorcycles.

The examples shown in the Rai3 report, as well as many of the incidents currently being discussed across Europe, involve high-power e-motos, Sur-Ron style bikes, electric Dirtbikes, and illegal e-scooters capable of speeds far beyond what is legally permitted for an EPAC.

A compliant EMTB in the EU and Italy is limited to pedal assistance, a maximum continuous rated power of 250 W, and assistance that cuts off at 25 km/h. Legally, it is classified as a bicycle.

The vehicles shown in many of these reports are mopeds or motorcycles in terms of performance and legal classification.

Lumping them together with EMTBs creates a misleading public perception and unfairly damages the reputation of riders who are using fully compliant bicycles.

If the goal is to improve safety and enforce existing regulations, then the discussion should focus on illegal e-motos and non-compliant vehicles, not on legitimate EMTBs that already operate within a well-defined legal framework. So what exactly is your problem?

If authorities, media outlets, uninformed influencers and industry associations fail to distinguish between legal EMTBs and illegal e-motos and e-Dirtbikes, they risk solving the wrong problem while unfairly targeting riders who are already complying with the law.

So, that‘s it for your strange Post which has absolutely nothing to do with eMTBs in Europe.

 

[Brawwp]

Skip to “power and performance”. These guys aren’t slouches on a bike and watch the clips of them climbing. It’s not that fast at all as you can see. I know regulations already exist (and Avinox may or may not fit that requirement), but you guys really need to just demo one to see it’s not crazy. As they said great traction control, very controllable power management and delivery. It just helps you make climbs you couldn’t before. I’m not comparing this to any other motors right now, I’m just saying that we don’t need to get our panties in a bunch and push the regulation talk more. IMO if stricter enforcement comes up, emtb guys need to ban together to get these regulations changed.

Just wanted you guys to at least visually see why this is all blown out of proportion. Plenty examples of people climbing and none of it even looks remotely crazy. If you blurred the bike you wouldn’t tell a difference from an avinox climbing to anything else available.

The 250w thing is ridiculous. Who is making these regulations? Every motor is already beyond or skirting around that. Can you guys not come together as an emtb community and push to have these regulations amended should it be necessary? I truly believe it will never be enforced on the trail as long as you aren’t on a throttle Surron type bike, but if the time does come you guys need to come together even if you don’t care because 2nm is all you need or whatever.
We already see plenty benefits to the market having avinox around. The competition is good and only benefits all of us. I don’t want to be limited to every motor having 250w continuous and 750w max or whatever. I enjoy being able to make climbs I couldn’t before. We shouldn’t be fighting each other. We should be supportive.

 

[Fangs2k]

The 250w thing is ridiculous. Who is making these regulations? Every motor is already beyond or skirting around that. Can you guys not come together as an emtb community and push to have these regulations amended should it be necessary?

It’s really not as simple as that, here in the UK anyway, but it’s all been said before so no point going over it again.

This is not about ‘hating on Avinox’ or the riders of same, I’m genuinely stoked for you that you’ve found your bike and tribe, it’s just about continued trail access.

 

[Brawwp]

It’s really not as simple as that, here in the UK anyway, but it’s all been said before so no point going over it again.

This is not about ‘hating on Avinox’ or the riders of same, I’m genuinely stoked for you that you’ve found your bike and tribe, it’s just about continued trail access.

Yeah that sucks man. I don’t picture ever seeing someone coming to check bikes on the trails, but if that happened why do you think it’d go to losing trail access for all vs just banning avinox bikes if that were the case?

 

[irie]

Skip to “power and performance”. These guys aren’t slouches on a bike and watch the clips of them climbing. It’s not that fast at all as you can see. I know regulations already exist (and Avinox may or may not fit that requirement), but you guys really need to just demo one to see it’s not crazy. As they said great traction control, very controllable power management and delivery. It just helps you make climbs you couldn’t before. I’m not comparing this to any other motors right now, I’m just saying that we don’t need to get our panties in a bunch and push the regulation talk more. IMO if stricter enforcement comes up, emtb guys need to ban together to get these regulations changed.

Just wanted you guys to at least visually see why this is all blown out of proportion. Plenty examples of people climbing and none of it even looks remotely crazy. If you blurred the bike you wouldn’t tell a difference from an avinox climbing to anything else available.

The 250w thing is ridiculous. Who is making these regulations? Every motor is already beyond or skirting around that. Can you guys not come together as an emtb community and push to have these regulations amended should it be necessary? I truly believe it will never be enforced on the trail as long as you aren’t on a throttle Surron type bike, but if the time does come you guys need to come together even if you don’t care because 2nm is all you need or whatever.
We already see plenty benefits to the market having avinox around. The competition is good and only benefits all of us. I don’t want to be limited to every motor having 250w continuous and 750w max or whatever. I enjoy being able to make climbs I couldn’t before. We shouldn’t be fighting each other. We should be supportive.

IIRC you live in Hawaii which was formally annexed by the USA in 1893.

By contrast in the UK (where I live) there are Bridleways and other rights of ways established over centuries and cyclists have the legal right to ride on Bridleways and many other rights of way. It is these legal rights that are potentially at stake.

When making posts it must be born in mind that (most of) those in the UK do not wish to risk the loss of these legal rights.

 

[Brawwp]

IIRC you live in Hawaii which was formally annexed by the USA in 1893.

By contrast in the UK (where I live) there are Bridleways and other rights of ways established over centuries and cyclists have the legal right to ride on Bridleways and many other rights of way. It is these legal rights that are potentially at stake.

When making posts it must be born in mind that (most of) those in the UK do not wish to risk the loss of these legal rights.

Yes but why would you lose access if you are within the regulations? If that were the case wouldn’t surrons and the like pose a bigger threat to everybody losing access? That’s what I’m not understanding. If they decide to pull people over and check wattage to enforce this regulation a) they’ll get money off the tickets given out and b) you’re fine if you aren’t on an illegal bike. If they are lazy and for whatever crazy reason stop all trail access to e-bikes, I think there will be plenty people, bike manufacturers, motor manufacturers to back you guys in keeping that access to not lose customers.

Idk maybe I’m totally thinking about this the wrong way, but it just seems like a lot of what-ifs and to me seems far fetched to lose access for all emtbs. Not to argue I’m just trying to understand why you’d lose it if you’re legal. It’s not your job to enforce this regulation. If they decide to enforce it then whatever, Avinox gotta go or change their software. Until then it seems pointless to argue about.

 

[irie]

Yes but why would you lose access if you are within the regulations? If that were the case wouldn’t surrons and the like pose a bigger threat to everybody losing access? That’s what I’m not understanding. If they decide to pull people over and check wattage to enforce this regulation a) they’ll get money off the tickets given out and b) you’re fine if you aren’t on an illegal bike. If they are lazy and for whatever crazy reason stop all trail access to e-bikes, I think there will be plenty people, bike manufacturers, motor manufacturers to back you guys in keeping that access to not lose customers.

Idk maybe I’m totally thinking about this the wrong way, but it just seems like a lot of what-ifs and to me seems far fetched to lose access for all emtbs. Not to argue I’m just trying to understand why you’d lose it if you’re legal. It’s not your job to enforce this regulation. If they decide to enforce it then whatever, Avinox gotta go or change their software. Until then it seems pointless to argue about.

Depends entirely on the definition of what is "an illegal bike" which will of course be completely different in the UK where legislation already exists.

 

[Brawwp]

Depends entirely on the definition of what is "an illegal bike" which will of course be completely different in the UK where legislation already exists.

Yeah. I really hope nothing comes of any of this. I think there are many possible cases though before emtbs that meet current regulations lose access. It’d be very lazy of your authorities to just blanket remove all access if you’re following the law. They could easily ticket the non-compliant or take even higher action of impounding a few bikes that are riding illegally. There would be a lot of people, companies, bike shops in your area that would have your backs if they tried to blanket remove access.

 

[Fangs2k]

Yeah that sucks man. I don’t picture ever seeing someone coming to check bikes on the trails, but if that happened why do you think it’d go to losing trail access for all vs just banning avinox bikes if that were the case?

Regulators here tend to go for the easy option unfortunately, because it would be difficult to police power etc they’d probably just go for the ‘no powered bikes on bridleways/public rights of way’ etc.

Anyway, thinking positive, hopefully it won’t come to that.

 

[Doomanic]

I hope nobody dissing Amflow is riding a derestricted bike...

 

[skizzian]

I hope nobody dissing Amflow is riding a derestricted bike...

not sure any one is dissing the bike.
Just concerned that knee jerk legislation is going to react to high powered motors - my bike is limited from 85 to 60Nm but it still draws 339W in turbo - exceeding 250W - don't want to be told I can only ride with permission on private land or other stupidness like licensing.

 

[RickBullotta]

not sure any one is dissing the bike.
Just concerned that knee jerk legislation is going to react to high powered motors - my bike is limited from 85 to 60Nm but it still draws 339W in turbo - exceeding 250W - don't want to be told I can only ride with permission on private land or other stupidness like licensing.

And those "high powered motors"...wait for it...top out at EXACTLY the same speed as the "low powered motors" and "mid powered motors".

Much ado about nothing.

 

[Grimtim2020]

I think that the land access restriction may come after a fatality on public accessible land. Most safety legislation is passed in a retrospective manner. So therefore ebikes will become a problem when somebody gets hurt but the manufacturers will need to ensure that they do not loose entire markets of ebikers due to land access. The issue will end up in court. However if you are a manufacturer who wants to safeguard your market in a particular country you might want ensure that they have done what is expected (best practice) to safeguard their product from being tampered with.

 

[RickBullotta]

I think that the land access restriction may come after a fatality on public accessible land. Most safety legislation is passed in a retrospective manner. So therefore ebikes will become a problem when somebody gets hurt but the manufacturers will need to ensure that they do not loose entire markets of ebikers due to land access. The issue will end up in court. However if you are a manufacturer who wants to safeguard your market in a particular country you might want ensure that they have done what is expected (best practice) to safeguard their product from being tampered with.

Bike fatalities are far more likely to occur on downhill terrain than uphill terrain...where there's effectively no difference.

 

[skizzian]

And those "high powered motors"...wait for it...top out at EXACTLY the same speed as the "low powered motors" and "mid powered motors".

Much ado about nothing.

I should have made it clearer. I’m talking about pedelec regulations in the UK. We have a 250W max. Continuous power requirement.

 

[RickBullotta]

I should have made it clearer. I’m talking about pedelec regulations in the UK. We have a 250W max. Continuous power requirement.

I understand - my point is that the regulators focusing on wattage or torque are looking at it completely wrong. Assist cutoff speed is really the only metric that matters. What's the point of a 2500W motor or 250Nm of torque if it's going to get cutoff at the same speed? It'll just chew up the battery faster (and be heavier). It will be self-regulating if we focus on the assist cutoff speed as the primary regulation (and require pedal assist for trail use, not throttles).

 

[Powerslider]

I think that the land access restriction may come after a fatality on public accessible land. Most safety legislation is passed in a retrospective manner. So therefore ebikes will become a problem when somebody gets hurt but the manufacturers will need to ensure that they do not loose entire markets of ebikers due to land access. The issue will end up in court. However if you are a manufacturer who wants to safeguard your market in a particular country you might want ensure that they have done what is expected (best practice) to safeguard their product from being tampered with.

Where is the fear based? Have you experienced anything being shut down because of a fatality? Have any roads been shuttered because of an auto accident? Have any bars been closed because a drunk patron caused a fatality? Have any trails been shuttered because of a meat bike fatality? What trauma is causing this stress?

 

[Powerslider]

I understand - my point is that the regulators focusing on wattage or torque are looking at it completely wrong. Assist cutoff speed is really the only metric that matters. What's the point of a 2500W motor or 250Nm of torque if it's going to get cutoff at the same speed? It'll just chew up the battery faster (and be heavier). It will be self-regulating if we focus on the assist cutoff speed as the primary regulation (and require pedal assist for trail use, not throttles).

With respect, I believe the metric that matters for the industry is distinguishing between eMTB and throttle e-bikes. My belief is that’s the source of the problem and that’s where the focus should be. Power and speed is a distraction and not truly addressing the core issue.

If there’s some regional issue that adds additional challenges; then that’s for those in that region to address locally. If someone’s region lacks a mechanism for change, that’s not good reason to shape the entire industry around their regulatory system.

 

[skizzian]

With respect, I believe the metric that matters for the industry is distinguishing between eMTB and throttle e-bikes. My belief is that’s the source of the problem and that’s where the focus should be. Power and speed is a distraction and not truly addressing the core issue.

If there’s some regional issue that adds additional challenges; then that’s for those in that region to address locally. If someone’s region lacks a mechanism for change, that’s not good reason to shape the entire industry around their regulatory system.

that's fair enough - I'd say that higher power would lead to higher speeds just in terms of maintaining impetus - me at 20mph is 1,072.8 kg⋅m/s of momentum - but that's just my belief - I don't actually think it's relevant.
all that is relevant is how the legal definition of pedelec is interpreted by UK test houses
UK legislation shouldn't affect any other countries products, just ones sold in the UK

 

[Joecrow]

It seems to me that most of the opinions in this thread are coming from the point of view of riders of mid engine EMTB pedalecs purchased from reputable manufactures fitted with motors that at least give lip service to the regulations regarding power output and max assist speed.
The problem is that there is a whole industry out there producing everything from hub motor conversion kits to electric motor bikes that are only interested in selling their products and don't give a damn about anything else. If you want a 1000W hub motor with throttle to convert your teenage son's old push bike into an e-bike no problem, just don't forget to put that 250W max sticker on it somewhere and tell him maybe he should wear a helmet as the bike will do 50mph without pedaling and not to get caught speeding or the police with confiscate the bike. That is what the authorities are seeing in addition to the concerns of the fire departments over e-bike cheap charger/battery fires! If they decide that the way to deal with this is to class all E-bikes as motorized vehicles it won't matter if you have a Bosch or Avinox motor in your EMTB you will still need number plates, insurance and everything else plus of course in the UK and Europe you will be banned from using bridleways and many other trails that are currently open to all bicycles.
We need to encourage the regulators to go after the bad players in the hope that they will leave real pedalecs classed as bicycles.