Moto rider here.
Let's be honest, these are eMotos and that distinction needs to be made clear in the nomenclature. Currently both bicycles and motorcycles are using the term "ebike" and that's half of the problem. If it is powered and has a throttle it's a motorcycle, imo.
An eBike, to me, can only be pedal assist.
this post was submitted on 01 Jan 2025
88 points (98.9% liked)
micromobility - Ebikes, scooters, longboards: Whatever floats your goat, this is micromobility
2407 readers
170 users here now
Ebikes, bicycles, scooters, skateboards, longboards, eboards, motorcycles, skates, unicycles: Whatever floats your goat, this is all things micromobility!
"Transportation using lightweight vehicles such as bicycles or scooters, especially electric ones that may be borrowed as part of a self-service rental program in which people rent vehicles for short-term use within a town or city.
micromobility is seen as a potential solution to moving people more efficiently around cities"
Feel free to also check out
It's a little sad that we need to actually say this, but:
Don't be an asshole or you will be permanently banned.
Respectful debate is totally OK, criticizing a product is fine, but being verbally abusive will not be tolerated.
Focus on discussing the idea, not attacking the person.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Thank God they regulated ebikes, I was worried that they were going to come after my SUV /s
Don't worry, your Child Crusher 9000 will be safe from all that mean safety legislation.
This law regulates vehicles with a throttle AKA what most people would consider an electric motorcycle. ebikes (meaning e-bicycles that you need to pedal to move) are unaffected.
They need to start allowing e-bikes to be registered and plated in CA. The Stark Varg EX is for sale, it's a perfectly capable street legal motorcycle but CA doesn't have Stark as a manufacturer in their system so people can't register it.
thats so dumb too. you would think the manufacturer detail should be freely written/typed out rather than a choice from a list under the assumption that they come and go like any other business. many car makes don't exist any more.
The throttle is a key feature to stay safe in busy intersections. That and super steep hills are the only reason to use it.
Legally, the throttle turns off once you hit 20mph. It's not for going fast, just for quick acceleration when you need it to be safe around cars.
Getting rid of the throttle is only going to make e-bikes more dangerous and less appealing for adoption.
I don't understand how it is a safety issue. Plenty of people ride bikes just fine without a throttle, and if you can't get started from a stop then the bike is too heavy for your skill level.
And that's the entire problem with the throttles. They are precisely what is enabling this trend towards bigger and heavier bikes in the first place, and that is blurring the line between bikes and mopeds in ways which are inviting unwanted regulations. Ban the throttles and the ridiculous fat tire mopeds will go away.
Exactly, one look at the photo used in the article:
Illustrates that this is not about regulating bicycles but electric mopeds/motorcycles.
Also this law is not a ban on throttles it just (correctly imo) reclassifies electric motorcycles as motor vehicles.
Sure, I can ride the bike without it, but I wouldn't go on the same roads or through the same large/busy intersections if I didn't think I could react to cars being cars.
Right, the entire point of an ebike is that you ride it like a bicycle, not a motorcycle, so that it can safely interact with pedestrians like a bicycle, not a motorcycle. A vehicle with the performance characteristics of a moped is not safe around pedestrians.
On my bike when I want to go faster I pedal harder. I legitimately do not even understand how throttle alone can be faster than assist unless it is being used to start a bike which is too heavy to start otherwise.
Pedalling through an intersection or through a turn or while doing hand signals (not both hands on the handlebars) is dangerous when in traffic. The throttle allows you to focus on your surroundings and still accelerate when in tight situations such as a busy intersection with cars around.
The throttle doesn't get you to go faster than pedalling with assist - the throttle cuts out at 20mph. Pedalling with assist is what brings you to top speed. High top speed is what's dangerous around pedestrians. Getting rid of the throttle won't make the bike safer around pedestrians.
The throttle is NOT for faster, it's for finesse and for speed maintenance. It's for being precise and technical in close quarters around cars. It's for boosting up a particularly steep hill so you don't slow down near hilltops when there are cars around that can't see over that hill.
Not having a throttle makes these bikes much more dangerous.
I legitimately do not even understand how throttle alone can be faster than assist
That's because it very much isn't. The throttle is for high torque situations, and cuts off at high rpm (as it should to not give the bike a moped's characteristics so the bike stays safe around pedestrians).
I'm sorry I have been riding bicycles and now ebikes for 30 years, with 20 years of urban commuting, and none of this makes sense to me. By this description a throttle seems worse for ergonomics because it requires you to keep your hand in a single spot. Hand placement is an important part of balance and riding dynamics. I can lane split just fine with pedals and I would argue that if you cannot then you are riding beyond your skill, which is a major issue with throttle bikes.
Again, unless you are riding a moped which is significantly heavier than a bike so the riding dynamics are more like a moped. Which is the thing we are specifically trying to prevent.
I read about this thing and expected the exact discussion taking place here. Even though we have bicycles that have much smaller assistance engines than the US has on their bikes/mopeds, we somehow manage to navigate traffic just fine.
There's probably some kind of explanation, I don't know what it is.
By this description a throttle seems worse for ergonomics because it requires you to keep your hand in a single spot. Hand placement is an important part of balance and riding dynamics.
Ergonomically, my bike makes it very easy to operate both the throttle and brakes with my hands balanced on the handlebar. I'd hope that's true for all bikes, since you don't want braking to fuck up your ability to maintain balance. Bikes are designed such that you can use the handlebars and finger-accessible controls simultaneously,
Foot position and pedal rotation is ALSO an important part if balance and riding dynamics, especially when turning through intersections at 20 mph. Instead of managing gyroscopic forces and compensating my balance, the throttle means I can lock my feet in place, stand up, look around, get better visibility, and be in better control with better awareness in high-traffic areas. All of these things make me safer, and keeps me aware of e.g. pedestrians who this bill supposedly benefits.
I am not familiar with urban commuting, as I've never lived in an urban area, so I can't comment on that specifically. I regularly cross busy 2-3 lane highways with 55 or 65 mph speed limits, with sometimes only a stop sign to help me do so. There are two big ones that I cross in each direction of my commute, or four per day. Depending on where I'm going and the weather, I take different crossings with different risk levels. In fact, 80% of my commute is along roads with 55+ mph speed limits; many of those roads include sections with steep, hilly terrain. Having a throttle to go from a standstill and quickly cross gaps in traffic, or to keep my speed up when fast-moving cars have low visibility in the hills, is a huge safety boon in my commute. It keeps me and those around me safer.
Ok, then you want a moped. And that's fine. But you need to understand why there are many people who want to preserve the distinction here for some very real reasons, largely involving how dangerous these vehicles have become in densly populated areas. Nobody is saying you can't have a throttle driven moped. You just cannot also have all the privileges of a bicycle at the same time.
Ok, but a class 3 ebike doesn't have the characteristic or riding dynamics of a motorcycle, which is what you used above to define a moped.
I don't want a moped because I don't want to register/license/insure it, because I much prefer the exercise and riding dynamics of an ebike, and because they are too fast and dangerous to be used as casually as I use my bike.
Perhaps an unpopular opinion but I think that if it has a throttle and goes faster than 15mph (25kph) then it belongs on the road with cars.
Well, at least it was a free opinion even if it doesn't turn out to be a popular one.
I find it so weird that some people are fine with vehicles going faster on bicycle lanes (and even worse with pavements for countries that allow that, which I also find weird, where is the pedestrian supposed to go in these cases ?). These fast vehicles make it so annoying and unsafe for other users.
I agree with you that if people want to go fast, well we already have roads for that.
Yeah, I don't think anyone would be advocating for allowing gas powered mopeds traveling at 40kph (25mph) on the sidewalk but when it's electric they somehow feel differently about it. Where ever we draw the line is going to be arbitrary but it needs to be drawn somewhere. I think 25kph (15mph) is a good limit as it's about the speed you can comfortably maintain with an acoustic bike as well. Me plus the bike is around 120kg (250lbs). That's a lot of energy hitting a pedestrian even at 15mph. It'll definitely cripple a grandmom.
Yeah, I don't think anyone would be advocating for allowing gas powered mopeds traveling at 40kph (25mph) on the sidewalk but when it's electric they somehow feel differently about it.
I hear the gas powered moped coming.
Where ever we draw the line is going to be arbitrary
Where you draw the line is arbitrary. We can instead use facts and reason.
I didn't draw that line - the European Union did. They probably have their facts and reasons for that but please, enlighten me about how combining pedestrians and fast moving vehicles is more reasonable.
please, enlighten me about how combining pedestrians and fast moving vehicles is more reasonable
I've made no claims except that I can hear a gas powered moped coming. The burden isn't upon me to explain.
They probably have their facts and reasons
Appeal to authority. Instead, explain why they reached their conclusions.
I see where you're coming from, but we also need to consider the mass of these vehicles, not just their speed. Person+bike at 50km/h vs pedestrian at rest means a roughly 1:1 split on the inertia after impact, and a pedestrian accelerated to 25km/h. Car at 50km/h vs person+bike at rest is a 1:10 or 1:20 split in inertia after impact, and rider accelerated to very nearly 50km/h.
IMO sharing a space with pedestrians is the lesser harm outcome if we cannot provide safe infrastructure which separates such vehicles from both cars and pedestrians.
In the Netherlands we have quite good infrastructure for bikes, but e-bikes/scooters going >25kph really fuck up the safety.
I’m with OP, if you want to go that fast you should be in the road.
It's not all about the impact. It's also about the chance or impact. If you're going at that speed on pedestrian zones, you'll eventually hit someone, or be very close to doing so. Pedestrians go in any direction, and can change at any time in an instant. If you go fast, no matter how fast your reflexes are, they won't be fast enough to brake in time on pedestrian zones.
The roads not being safe for non-cars is not the problem for pedestrians. Use the bike lane in those cases.
I would even say that a normal bike with a >25km/h drive does not belong in public traffic. You can only put a certain amount of breaking power on a bike.
Unless you mean trying to do 60 to 0km/h over a few meters is harder to stop without being launched, there is no way there is any notable limit to braking power. I can easily stop in half what a small car can do in any conditions, and less if I hang off the back and squeeze the seat with my thighs really hard to not launch over the bars. I could probably push it even more and do even shorter but it would need a lot more traction and front vs rear weight considerations and wear the tires super fast.
Now teach this to the senior citizens here who have learned to run their ebikes at top speed without having the skills to control it.
And in case you wonder, they brake with the power they remember from riding a normal bike many years ago.
I dunno, I guess its a regional thing. I live between a couple popular areas for downhill. all the old guys I worked with are downhill mtb and road racers. they taught me the advanced braking among other things.
I also don't get the brake memory thing because hydraulic disc brakes on my first adult bike are way stronger than my kid bike rim brakes from when I was in school and I stopped full power and did that front wheel down rear wheel in the air thing on my second or so ride. Even cable brakes on my brother's ebike stop strong but just feel worse.
Maybe it is. We had several issues and accidents here with elder people and ebikes that resulted from loss of control or insufficient brake use. Of course those bikes have hydraulic disc brakes here, too, but my personal theory is that many older riders who grew up with rim brakes are afraid to use modern braking systems because they are so powerful.
So the list of ebikers hitting something (mostly in the dark), running off the road in curves, or hitting people (often in places where they did not belong in the first place, like pedestrian zones) has become a real issue here.
Most of it is either self-inflicted, or accidents with pedestrians where the biker is at fault.
My radwagon motor tops out at 32kph, I can pedal it up to about 40kph. At 40kph I can stop in 3m on dry tarmac, about 6m in snow.
For comparison, the cars I'm forced to ride with have a 24m braking distance at 40kph, but let's be honest, there's usually doing over 50kph despite the limit, so it's more like 38-55m
I do not understand why this is being implemented, after reading the article. What's the safety gain to be had here?
Throttles are a big factor enabling this legal gray market for e mopeds. Without throttles most of these bikes are basically too heavy to ride as a pedelac. This will push the trend back towards lighter, bike-like bikes.
It clarifies their class so if an area is limited with no throttle E-bikes it can allow level 1 and 3 instead of only level 1
I imagine it's to stop them being used like motorcycles? Can't say why, maybe it's for registration / taxation purposes?
My nephew is 12 and has one of these with a throttle that can go over 35mph. His parents let him ride it anywhere (fucking irresponsible, but don’t get me started).
The fact is, because it looks like a bicycle, he’s essentially able to ride around like he’s on a motorcycle, even though he’s too young to have a drivers license and has no formal training in rules of the road.
Ok, but they really can't be used as motorcycles, regardless. You're pedalling 99% of the time, and to have any respectable range your legs are providing the majority of the power.
Electric vehicles with a throttle (what the law is targeting) can absolutely be used as motorcycles. Hence why CA feels motorcycle-like vehicles need to be reclassified. What the law is targeting are functionally motorcycles/mopeds with pedals attached.
I have one of those and have thousands of miles recorded on it. It's been my primary method of commuting to work for the past 1.5 years. For the battery to last the 40 mile round trip, my legs are the primary driver.
They don't really work as motorcycles because the throttle cuts off at 20 mph. Short of adding more heavy batteries (thereby requiring a beefier motorcycle motor), they don't have the range to be a motorcycle.
If your legs are the primary driver then you do not have the type of vehicle the law is targeting.
I have a class 3 ebike, which is exactly the class of vehicle that this law is targeting.
Here in Melbourne, Australia, they use them like motorcycles everywhere.
Every single food panda, or other delivery rider is on an e bike with throttle, and they never peddle.
They ride at full speed, on the roads, like motorcycles.
It's totally doable. Thousands are doing it every day here.
Ok, but these are US street legal ebikes.
I have put thousands of miles on my class 3 as my primary commute. Definitely pedal powered with some motorized assistance.
Perhaps with your preferred brand(s) of ebikes. This law is targeting Super73 and similar brands that advertise and promote post-sale "off-road" or "unlimited" modifications. These modified bikes have been a nuisance on public trails for a few years now.
Maybe this is a stupid question, but how does the law treat "improvised" e-bikes which are pedal-powered bicycles with motors added by their owners? They aren't officially in any particular "class". I suppose they're all not street-legal...
I imagine it's one of those things where it's not technically legal, but as long as you're not doing 40 mph on your e-bike you're unlikely to be bothered about it.
view more: next ›