E-bikes: depressing or what?

[Stevek76]

The fact that e-bikes need to be pedal assisted seems to imply that the pedaling is important in some way, and that there would be something wrong in using an e-bike in a way that didn't require exercise.

Just an observation, not trying to make any particular point...

I think you've made a good point, and one that I agree with.

Except the same regulations that insist on pedal assist, also specify the amount of motor assistance that can be provided, which when people use to it's full regulated extent, you don't agree with...
I don't think the regulations were designed to ensure users got plenty of exercise, more that they would be a subset of cycling and co exist in the same spaces. I see plenty of people cycling without assistance that also put in the least effort possible, see it as transport rather than exercise and probably don't get much health benefit from it, nothing wrong with that, it's all about choice.

That. The point of cycle paths is they're not roads. If you start letting things with considerably superior power/speed etc on them then you lose that point and it's unpleasant for the non powered cyclists, the requirement to pedal is part of that restriction.

[PH]

Whilst I'm sure the official line is one of welcome, I'd warrant it has its limits which are member dependant.
For example, would I as a fit middle aged bloke who's obviously capable of the distance manually turned up on one? Would everyone be welcoming?

Yes, even more welcome if you did an extra turn on the front into a headwind

[rfryer]

I've been quite surprised to see how generally accepting of e-bikes we are - so put together a little poll to see how far it can be pushed! See here

[mjr]

Whilst I'm sure the official line is one of welcome, I'd warrant it has its limits which are member dependant.
For example, would I as a fit middle aged bloke who's obviously capable of the distance manually turned up on one? Would everyone be welcoming?

Who knows what "everyone" would do? If someone was rude about it, I expect they'd be asked to reconsider, shall we say, the same as has happened about certain other characteristics in the past (including the inevitable headwear). You have reminded me to add "e-bikes" to the list "mountain bike, hybrid, commuter, racer, folding, tricycle, recumbent, tandem, fixed single-speed... anything goes and often has!" which may have been written 20 years ago - how long have e-bikes been around now?

[kwackers]

how long have e-bikes been around now?

A long time.
I tried to make one in the 70's. Had I had welding equipment I reckon I'd have done it too! The lack of electronic controllers made the 'snatch' from the car starter motor a bit much, it used to rip off whatever I'd attached to it to drive the chain.

A guy up the road from us had an electric car (Hillman Hunter??) He'd hacked the guts from a milk float on it.

[mjr]

Please imagine that my post had the word "legal" or "approved" or some such in it

[kwackers]

Please imagine that my post had the word "legal" or "approved" or some such in it

Did people care about such things back in the 70's? Where they actually illegal???

What happened to the spirit of inventiveness...

[hjd10]

I'm thinking about building up a front hub motor E-bike for a commuting bike to travel 5 miles each way to work and back. There is one nasty hill on the way to work that with some assistance would allow me to get to work without having to shower etc.
If E-bikes allow people to continue cycling I'm all for it.

[thirdcrank]

... Did people care about such things back in the 70's? Where they actually illegal???

What happened to the spirit of inventiveness...

A couple of pics from even longer ago than the 70's.

http://www.leodis.net/display.aspx?reso ... 211_174325
http://www.leodis.net/display.aspx?reso ... 211_174326

[kwackers]

A couple of pics from even longer ago than the 70's.

http://www.leodis.net/display.aspx?reso ... 211_174325
http://www.leodis.net/display.aspx?reso ... 211_174326

80 mile range! Not to be scoffed at.

[Username]

but the bikes must have speed limiters

Why speed? Why not power?

What limits the speed of an ordinary bike? Answer the power.
Why should speed be the preserve of the young and fit?

Seems to me that a power limit with no speed restrictions levels the playing field, or perhaps that's what folk are truly afraid of..

Because with more more there is more excellence. The Saturn V rocket that got geezers on the Moon was the most powerful man made object up to that time. The camera that took photos of the heart on Pluto was one of the fastest ever launches. Plus jet and rocket engines are just biblically cool! I mean check this out.. Get close passed by one of em and you'l know all about it!

Lets not forget when things go wrong. Heres what happens when something powerful goes wrong. Heres what happens when something unpowerful goes wrong.

As I have just proved, more power is almost always better. Less power is only good when it applies to how hard your opponent can throw a punch, but my logic still holds true for your fists.

[kwackers]

Because with more more there is more excellence. The Saturn V rocket that got geezers on the Moon was the most powerful man made object up to that time. The camera that took photos of the heart on Pluto was one of the fastest ever launches. Plus jet and rocket engines are just biblically cool! I mean check this out.. Get close passed by one of em and you'l know all about it!
<snip>

You've convinced me.

No wait, what are you talking about?
How does that answer the question "Why speed, Why not power"?

What has the most powerful rocket got to do with leaving the 250w limit alone and simply not trying to restrict speed? If speed is an issue how about simply limiting the maximum speed of any pushbike to 15mph?
If you're caught over 15mph then it's an automatic fine?

You might want to read this link

[meic]

If you're caught over 15mph then it's an automatic fine?

ebikes are allowed to do over 15mph and frequently do so. I have cycled alongside them at 30mph.

It is perfectly valid for them to have the assist restricted to only being applied at restricted speeds.
The valid objection being that it doesnt substantially up the danger already posed by unassisted cyclists. The main lobby group to keep this restriction will not be racing cyclists nursing their egos, but pedestrians who dont want a stealth motorisation of the shared use facilities.

[kwackers]

The main lobby group to keep this restriction will not be racing cyclists nursing their egos, but pedestrians who dont want a stealth motorisation of the shared use facilities.

Watching some of the lycra crowd at work and listening to pedestrians I think they already have them.
Using legs rather than motors makes no difference particularly when the power is about the same. So in the respect of shared facilities if folk can't use them properly then I'm all for removing their rights to them.

[mjr]

The main lobby group to keep this restriction will not be racing cyclists nursing their egos, but pedestrians who dont want a stealth motorisation of the shared use facilities.

Watching some of the lycra crowd at work and listening to pedestrians I think they already have them.
Using legs rather than motors makes no difference particularly when the power is about the same. So in the respect of shared facilities if folk can't use them properly then I'm all for removing their rights to them.

Do you mean banning specific people from cycling or something else?