what power/speed would you like if no regulations

[Oldjohnw]

I must say once I am over 25kph I never notice cutting out.

They only time I am aware is the very rare occasion when the contact disc has come disconnected by an extra millimetre, perhaps after a major bump on the road and I have lost power. This obviously only happens at low speed.

[reohn2]

FWIW
Whilst I think 20mph would be a better advantage for cycling,there are other ways to look at why 15.5mph is the limit set.
The main one is that it's unrestricted in the sense the rider doesn't need MOT,Third party insurance or a licence,and the age limit is much lower(14years?),so practically anyone can walk into a shop and having no previous cycling or road craft experience at all,walk out with an e-bike and off they go.
I understand the experienced cyclists POV who can and has experience handling a bike at speed,wanting more.But it simply isn't potentially safe for the novice cyclist or indeed some cyclists of long standing who aren't used to higher speeds,especially in traffic and in this country some of that traffic being very aggressive(the curbing of such driving attitude is another story).

The answer surely must be a seperate catagory with more legal implications similar to moped laws,30mph limit on speed,seperate reg plate,along with third party insurance cover,MOT,and a seperate licence catagory,probably covered by a full car or motorcycle licence or an extended CBT e-bike licence for the new specific catagory for those without such licences.

My 2d's worth

[kwackers]

The answer surely must be a seperate catagory with more legal implications similar to moped laws,30mph limit on speed,seperate reg plate,along with third party insurance cover,MOT,and a seperate licence catagory,probably covered by a full car or motorcycle licence or an extended CBT e-bike licence for the new specific catagory for those without such licences.

My 2d's worth

Isn't that what we already have?
My view is it's too near a motorbike license. The only real difference is you can ride it in perpetuity on L plates.
Get rid of the MOT, license plate and license and I think it makes sense. Once you add those back on you'd be better off buying a proper motorbike.

I also get what you're saying about youngsters but in reality they can (and do) ride on the road from a much younger age anyway.
I don't think a (potentially, on a good day) 20mph bike offers much extra danger. Perhaps having an age/training requirement for anyone wanting to ride a bicycle on the road would be a better solution?
(It's not like you don't see them all the time without brakes and/or the seat down by the pedals, hard to imagine how an ebike could be any more dangerous).

[peterb]

FWIW
Whilst I think 20mph would be a better advantage for cycling,there are other ways to look at why 15.5mph is the limit set.
The main one is that it's unrestricted in the sense the rider doesn't need MOT,Third party insurance or a licence,and the age limit is much lower(14years?),so practically anyone can walk into a shop and having no previous cycling or road craft experience at all,walk out with an e-bike and off they go.
I understand the experienced cyclists POV who can and has experience handling a bike at speed,wanting more.But it simply isn't potentially safe for the novice cyclist or indeed some cyclists of long standing who aren't used to higher speeds,especially in traffic and in this country some of that traffic being very aggressive(the curbing of such driving attitude is another story).

The answer surely must be a seperate catagory with more legal implications similar to moped laws,30mph limit on speed,seperate reg plate,along with third party insurance cover,MOT,and a seperate licence catagory,probably covered by a full car or motorcycle licence or an extended CBT e-bike licence for the new specific catagory for those without such licences.

My 2d's worth

Much of what you say could be applied to the novice walking out of the bike shop with a new expensive high spec road bike 'and off they go' unrestricted, inexperienced, a danger to themselves and others. It seems to be forgotten that the ebike will not reach theses dangerous 'higher' speeds without considerable input from the leg muscles of the rider. The majority of ebikes are assisted and will not attain 25 kph by themselves. You don't HAVE TO ride at the cut off-limit, and of course it's possible to ride above the cut-off limit using leg power alone if capable of doing so.

[reohn2]

I think it's important to not only think about the e-bike rider's safety but also the safety of other road users too,and whilst it's true anyone can walk into a shop and walk out with a bike or an e-bike and ride it on the road,an e-bike is only powered to a degree,which wouldn't exceed human power alone,true someone who's fit and active could be much quicker than an e-bike rider it doesn't negate my point about higher powered e-bikes.
We shouldn't forget that cyclists,including e-bikes that meet current EU/UK standards use the roads by right and not by licence.Whether that's up for debate is the subject of another thread,what's being discussed is e-bikes that exceed current legislation.

IMHO more powerful faster e-bikes,that have a maximum speed of say 30mph,need vehicle and rider qualification to be ridden on the road,such a vehicle needs regular safety checks in the form of an MOT.
Also from the POV of road safety there needs to be some qualification to ride such a vehicle,which needs to come under a driving licence law of some kind.
Such a driving licence IMO would be covered by a full car or motorcycle licence or in it's absence a lesser qualification of an extended training course followed by a test along with mandatory third party insurance to cover that particular class of vehicle.
Such vehicles would ridden on the road under licence which is perfectly reasonable in a modern road traffic environment,other people may have other opinions which are open for discussion,those are mine.

[mattsccm]

I would like to see a compromise set up. Higher speeds , say 25mph but the need to do training like a motorcycle CBT. Throw in a mandated small charge insurance fee and some form of machine identity. Plus helmet. Sort of moped but easier to do and cheaper. Highly optimistic though. Raod use only.

[The utility cyclist]

restricted more, back to 12mph top speed, there's absolutely no need for faster, all the additional power/speed does is increase average speed a bit and subsequently shorten range, also increased speed/power decreases safety. We've already seen the evidence that the existing speeds are too much and that electric assist bikes bring about more death and injury from those using them.

For those seeking more adventure, there is no need for additional speed or power, for those seeking to have help with mobility, there is no need for additional speed/power, for those seeking to extend their commute distance, there is no need to increase speed of the machine or power. Increasing speed/power will not sway motor vehicles drivers to leave their personal motorised conveyances in favour of electric assist either.

I would like to see a compromise set up. Higher speeds , say 25mph but the need to do training like a motorcycle CBT. Throw in a mandated small charge insurance fee and some form of machine identity. Plus helmet. Sort of moped but easier to do and cheaper. Highly optimistic though. Raod use only.

25mph makes it an electric motorbike/moped in all but name, that means more reckless behaviour and more harm to the rider and others around them no matter how much training you give them.

[kwackers]

restricted more, back to 12mph top speed,

Why not limit bicycles to 12mph?
You could do it by legally limiting the gearing so that 12mph required a cadence of (say) 100.

Slower is safer, what's not to like?


You did of course completely miss the point of using an electric bike for a commute, it's not necessarily to increase the distance but often to decrease the time and since time and speed are related...
As for not getting people out of their cars, do you have evidence they don't work? Those folk I see commuting on ebikes, presumably they don't have a car?

For me without the ebike there was no way I would do the commute by bicycle and the only reason I wouldn't use the car is because it was barely cheaper than the train.
These days though we have electric cars, suddenly that 40 odd mile commute is costing 50p as opposed to a tenner on the train, given I think it's unlikely the train is going to be appealing any time soon then all those cyclists I pass have one more car to contend with...
(Assuming I need to go into work at any point)

[hemo]

I would like to see a compromise set up. Higher speeds , say 25mph but the need to do training like a motorcycle CBT. Throw in a mandated small charge insurance fee and some form of machine identity. Plus helmet. Sort of moped but easier to do and cheaper. Highly optimistic though. Raod use only.

The Speed pedelces requirements cover this for 30mph up to 500w rated motors, the requirement is for a M/C helmet to be used and road use only. Main problem is most insurers have no data base to go buy for sensible insurance costs.

[The utility cyclist]

restricted more, back to 12mph top speed,

Why not limit bicycles to 12mph?
You could do it by legally limiting the gearing so that 12mph required a cadence of (say) 100.

Slower is safer, what's not to like?


You did of course completely miss the point of using an electric bike for a commute, it's not necessarily to increase the distance but often to decrease the time and since time and speed are related...
As for not getting people out of their cars, do you have evidence they don't work? Those folk I see commuting on ebikes, presumably they don't have a car?

For me without the ebike there was no way I would do the commute by bicycle and the only reason I wouldn't use the car is because it was barely cheaper than the train.
These days though we have electric cars, suddenly that 40 odd mile commute is costing 50p as opposed to a tenner on the train, given I think it's unlikely the train is going to be appealing any time soon then all those cyclists I pass have one more car to contend with...
(Assuming I need to go into work at any point)

Electric assist cycles are not limited to 12mph are they so your point is rather moot, however having the extra power and higher speed on tap whilst you barely turn the pedals over makes a significant difference in behaviour, search these very forums for how users talk with pride at how their behaviour changes with the 'free' speed. One is able to build up to faster speeds through ability and experience, with the aid of a power unit you add in acceleration as well as faux speed that many simply cannot manage to maintain under their own steam. Older folk, those whom hae not ridden a bike for a long while are then able to scoot along at a speed they've not done in possibly 40 years if ever, you understand how speed plays a part in the inexperienced right?

As for modal share, have a look to Netherlands and Germany, massive sales of e-assist cycles and we've seen in Germany fewer people riding bikes overall and no increases in Netherlands, if not decreases there also. Over the same period of the massive upsurge in pedelecs there's been an increase n car sales in both countries. Netherlands also showed that whilst younger age groups got safer, the age groups that were buying e-bikes the most had significant increases in deaths, there were no more people riding but a large increase in deaths of a specific subset whilst in the non ebuying groups there was a significant drop.

How does having 15.5mph on tap make any difference to having 12 mph on tap, how does having extra power make any difference? How many people commute 40miles or make 40 mile journeys? How many would want to convert to a cycle for such a journey even if they could? The appeal of the high power e-cycle for longer commuting distances is just a figment of imagination, and to change the laws regards output and speed on tap to fit in with a tiny fraction of a very small % is not just daft it's dangerous and reckless.

[kwackers]

<snip>

Ignoring the supposition on your part it seems most of your argument is "old people are slow and shouldn't be allowed to go as fast as me because they'll hurt themselves".

Here's the rub.
Bicycles are dangerous, far more dangerous than cars. Why not ban them or at least stop them sharing the roads?
You can argue that cars are the problem but cars aren't going to go away anytime soon so the only 'fix' for the problem is a ban on bicycles.
Nobody can deny that we wont see an immediate uptick in public safety.

However, who am I to say you can't "risk" your own safety?
I'm the same person who wouldn't deny an old person the ability to travel at modest bicycle speeds.
And they are modest, on the flat a decently fit young cyclist can hit 30mph whereas an old person relying on their ebike will never be able to get it to go any faster than the maximum assist.

KSI's on bicycles are very low numbers, so low it's difficult to draw conclusions from them. eBike are more of the same but worst, they're simply aren't enough of them around.

I've no doubt that some folk jump straight on one and have some issues - they'd have issues on a bicycle too. But I also think that as ebikes mature, become more prevalent and their novelty wears off this becomes much less of an issue. Lots of cyclists have both ebikes and normal bikes, as they age they'll take that experience with them.

Lets not kid ourselves that the streets are running red with the blood of fallen aged ebikers, despite your rant it's simply not true.
ebikes are still new, a lot of people are still unaware of them and I suspect a decent percentage of their users are cyclists anyway.

They're also here to stay despite your obvious antagonism towards them and it's vanishingly unlikely speeds would be reduced - not that anyone would take any notice if they were.

[Oldjohnw]

If restrictions were eased you could add a potentially powerful motor to an unroadworthy bike. Inadequate brakes, work rims, slipping gears and a whole host of problems.

On a personal level, I average 11.7 mph. I imagine most pedal cyclists do similar or better. I am a threat to no-one, including myself.

[kwackers]

If restrictions were eased you could add a potentially powerful motor to an unroadworthy bike. Inadequate brakes, work rims, slipping gears and a whole host of problems.

On a personal level, I average 11.7 mph. I imagine most pedal cyclists do similar or better. I am a threat to no-one, including myself.

Just to point out, I don't advocate increasing motor power, merely removing the artificial limit and the need to pedal.

Also, if you want to add a motor to an unroadworthy bike there's nothing stopping you, although I suspect if you've the nounce to fit a motor you can probably service the bike.

[peterb]

restricted more, back to 12mph top speed, there's absolutely no need for faster, all the additional power/speed does is increase average speed a bit and subsequently shorten range, also increased speed/power decreases safety. We've already seen the evidence that the existing speeds are too much and that electric assist bikes bring about more death and injury from those using them.

For those seeking more adventure, there is no need for additional speed or power, for those seeking to have help with mobility, there is no need for additional speed/power, for those seeking to extend their commute distance, there is no need to increase speed of the machine or power. Increasing speed/power will not sway motor vehicles drivers to leave their personal motorised conveyances in favour of electric assist either.

I would like to see a compromise set up. Higher speeds , say 25mph but the need to do training like a motorcycle CBT. Throw in a mandated small charge insurance fee and some form of machine identity. Plus helmet. Sort of moped but easier to do and cheaper. Highly optimistic though. Raod use only.

25mph makes it an electric motorbike/moped in all but name, that means more reckless behaviour and more harm to the rider and others around them no matter how much training you give them.

There is just so much to disagree with in this post. But remember the current legal limit of 25kph is NOT top speed, it is the speed at which assistance cuts out. I disagree strongly with your statement "for those seeking to have help with mobility, there is no need for additional speed/power". I am 73, with peripheral arterial disease, arteries in both legs partially blocked. Now unable to ride more than 2 -3 miles on an unassisted bike without great pain. An assisted ebike allowed me to continue riding with the club leisure group ridess (which I organised for many years). The average speed of the easier group would be 12- 13 mph. I do find that on occasion assistance over the 15.5mph cut-off would be helpful to enable me to stay with the group. 15mph is not fast on a road bike, I am often travelling well over that on slight down hill stretches within a few hundred yards of home ....

[stodd]

restricted more, back to 12mph top speed,

Why not limit bicycles to 12mph?
Slower is safer, what's not to like?

You did of course completely miss the point of using an electric bike for a commute, it's not necessarily to increase the distance but often to decrease the time and since time and speed are related...
As for not getting people out of their cars, do you have evidence they don't work? Those folk I see commuting on ebikes, presumably they don't have a car?

Ah, if we limit cars to 12mph (assisted, they can go faster downhill or if you can push) and bikes to 15.5mph we get much better safety and can persuade more commuters out of their cars.