e-Bikes – Let’s talk
Our Community › Forums › Commuters › e-Bikes – Let’s talk
- This topic has 1,364 replies, 117 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 3 weeks ago by
Max Silverstone.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 16, 2017 at 9:35 pm #1072409
sjclaeys
Participant@AFHokie 161753 wrote:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930AZ using Tapatalk
I hope that guy isn’t asking the woman in the water if she needs any help. Whoops, wrong thread!
June 16, 2017 at 11:44 pm #1072411rcannon100
Participant@sjclaeys 161776 wrote:
I hope that guy isn’t asking the woman in the water if she needs any help. Whoops, wrong thread!
June 17, 2017 at 1:15 am #1072415dbb
Participant@sjclaeys 161776 wrote:
I hope that guy isn’t asking the woman in the water if she needs any help. Whoops, wrong thread!
As long as it isn’t Bob Cannon.
June 27, 2017 at 4:22 pm #1072799Brendan von Buckingham
ParticipantI think the term used here to which some aspire is to be agnostic on ebikes. I try to be agnostic too. But it’s hard when you walk into Revolution in Clarendon for a quick bike part and you see that all the bikes for sale on the first floor have motors. It’s like a 100 year time warp and Indian Motorcycles are all the rage again.
Sigh.
June 27, 2017 at 6:29 pm #1072804baiskeli
ParticipantThere is no safe way for cyclists to cross the Potomac bridges except on sidewalks/paths.
@AFHokie 161753 wrote:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930AZ using Tapatalk
This isn’t safe either – he’s not wearing a helmet.
June 27, 2017 at 8:30 pm #1072810consularrider
ParticipanteBikes are much more common around here (Germany). I’m routinely passed by senior riders making little effort on heavy city style bikes. Oh wait, that’s just ’cause I’m getting old and slow.
Then there is this Renault, about the same size as the ELF.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]15060[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]15061[/ATTACH]
June 27, 2017 at 11:32 pm #1072813AFHokie
Participant@baiskeli 162230 wrote:
This isn’t safe either – he’s not wearing a helmet.
Or a personal flotation device
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930AZ using Tapatalk
June 28, 2017 at 2:46 pm #1072825Brett L.
Participant@consularrider 162236 wrote:
eBikes are much more common around here (Germany). I’m routinely passed by senior riders making little effort on heavy city style bikes. Oh wait, that’s just ’cause I’m getting old and slow.
Then there is this Renault, about the same size as the ELF.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]15060[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]15061[/ATTACH]
Would that vehicle fall into the NEV category (neighbourhood electric vehicle)?
June 28, 2017 at 4:04 pm #1072827Judd
Participantconsularrider;162236 wrote:ebikes are much more common around here (germany). I’m routinely passed by my fellow senior riders making little effort on heavy city style bikes.ftfy
July 30, 2017 at 4:18 am #1073911July 30, 2017 at 4:25 pm #1073913sjclaeys
Participant@Dewey 163423 wrote:
Sigh…
It is an odd op-ed. The writer clearly doesn’t like e-bikes on MUPs, but doesn’t give any solid reasons other than an oblique reference to safety. He seems more concerned about an unholy alliance of bike and auto manufacturers (who would’ve thought) and there not being a sufficient effort to find out what non-ebilke cyclists think about e-bikes on MUPs.
July 31, 2017 at 1:58 pm #1073917EasyRider
ParticipantThought experiment: if federal law required e-bikes to emit the sound of a two-stroke Puch Maxi moped, would you support allowing their use on multi-use paths?
July 31, 2017 at 8:39 pm #1073936dasgeh
Participant@EasyRider 163432 wrote:
Thought experiment: if federal law required e-bikes to emit the sound of a two-stroke Puch Maxi moped, would you support allowing their use on multi-use paths?
If federal law required non-e-bikes to emit the sound of a two-stroke Puch Maxi moped, would you support allowing their use on multi-use paths?
July 31, 2017 at 8:42 pm #1073937dasgeh
Participant@Dewey 163423 wrote:
Sigh…
There’s been a spirited love-fest of ebikes on the Women & Bikes listserve. Many, if not most, of the women there are in the coveted “interested but concerned” category. And they universally support allowing ebikes on trails, while focusing on policing behavior of everyone.
July 31, 2017 at 8:49 pm #1073939cvcalhoun
Participant@Dewey 163423 wrote:
Sigh…
But advocates offer no data demonstrating the demand or explaining why there isn’t enough paved roadway where motorized vehicles already are legal.
Seriously, dude? Let’s see who uses e-bikes?
* Pregnant women.
* People using box bikes to carry small children.
* 80-year-olds who can’t make it up those steep hills.None of these people would be safe on the roads.
We have MUPs in the first place because:
* Bikes can’t keep up with traffic.
* In a crash involving a car and a bike, the bike loses.
* People on quiet vehicles that don’t pollute want to escape the noise and pollution of auto traffic.
* We want to encourage use of vehicles that don’t pollute the way cars do.Every one of these things is equally true of e-bikes.
The author seems to have confused an e-bike with a moped. But federal law already distinguishes between a vehicle that is mostly foot-powered, is no more noisy than a bike, and can only go about 20 miles per hour (which many can exceed without e-assist) and a moped. I wouldn’t have an issue with also banning enclosed vehicles (e.g., the Elf) from the MUPs, because they do create more problems than regular bikes. I see no reason at all to ban other e-bikes.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.