e-Bikes – Let’s talk

[scoot]

@EasyRider 168202 wrote:

Who’s up for a word problem?

I’ve been trying to calculate the speed of the full throttle e-bike that passed me alongside the Pentagon Monday night. I guess it was Class 2, because the rider wasn’t pedaling as he/she accelerated past me in the bridge construction zone, without warning (out of ignorance, I’m sure, not malice, but I digress). By the time I got almost to the guard booth near the 9/11 memorial, I could look up to the AF Memorial and see the e-bike (it’s taillights) nearing the intersection of Columbia Pike and Southgate. Google Maps estimates that to be a little less than half a mile away. Since I was going about 12mph myself, how fast was the e-bike going to put that much distance between us? Hint: I have no idea

I doubt the rider is on Strava (I’m not) but he/she would have passed the AF memorial about 6:50pm on Monday.

Very rough estimate: 27 MPH

According to Google Maps, you covered 0.4 miles (from the bridge over 110 to the guard booth near the AF Memorial) in the time that the e-bike traveled 0.9 (to the intersection of Columbia Pike and Southgate). 12MPH * (0.9/0.4) = 27 MPH

Presumably one could get a better estimate using distance data more accurate than a tenth of a mile, but this is probably within 20%

[EasyRider]

@scoot 168211 wrote:

Very rough estimate: 27 MPH

According to Google Maps, you covered 0.4 miles (from the bridge over 110 to the guard booth near the AF Memorial) in the time that the e-bike traveled 0.9 (to the intersection of Columbia Pike and Southgate). 12MPH * (0.9/0.4) = 27 MPH

Presumably one could get a better estimate using distance data more accurate than a tenth of a mile, but this is probably within 20%

Yeah, that was my guesstimate — in excess of 20mph. I mentioned this because I got the impression from NovaEBike’s post that ebikes that can be operated throttle only (no pedaling) max out at 20mph. This rider was not pedaling when he/she passed me, and was not really dressed to do so once out of my sight (wool coat, office attire, sitting bolt upright). What qualifies as “pedaling” to get speeds over 20mph? Just making the pedals move to disable the governor? Or actually contributing power?

Also – I doubt this rider is on Strava. If someone can check Strava for the fastest ever stretch between the 110 bridge overpass to the intersection at southgate road, I could see how bad my estimates are. I’ve been doing this commute for years and I’m seen my share of fast riders, but this one was cookin’.

[Dewey]

@EasyRider 168217 wrote:

I got the impression from NovaEBike’s post that ebikes that can be operated throttle only (no pedaling) max out at 20mph.

That is true for legit Class 2 and 3 ebikes, if it has a throttle it’s supposed to cut out at 20mph then on Class 3 ebikes the rider has to use pedal assist up to 28mph. But there are some exceptions, for some reason Prodecotech have a 28mph throttle and pedal assist ebike, the Outlaw 1200, that technically isn’t a Class 3 ebike because the throttle can be used up to the max speed. An unrestricted and illegal for street use ebike may use a throttle for when power exceeds the gearing/capacity for the rider to keep up with the motor, some such riders talk about ‘clown pedalling’ to trick a pedal cadence sensor into turning on the motor but could also be an anti-social slur on legal pedelec riders, like I said in a previous post we’re the Rodney Dangerfield of cyclists.

Here’s a description of some of the different types of pedal assist torque sensors, pedal cadence sensors might measure rotational speed or act as a simple power on/off switch if it detects the pedals turning, they vary significantly in price, a quality bottom bracket torque sensor might be $240 while a spring gauge on rear derailleur hanger torque sensor might cost only a few dollars but require a frame designed to use it, and a simple clip-on pedal cadence sensor might be $24, some quality systems like Bosch may use a combination of 2 or 3 types of sensors plus a wheel speed sensor all feeding into the controller’s software.

[EasyRider]

@Dewey 168225 wrote:

a 28mph throttle and pedal assist ebike, the Outlaw 1200, that technically isn’t a Class 3 ebike because the throttle can be used up to the max speed.

lol

The technology is really neat, I enjoyed learning about the sensors.

It’s a shame that to get people to buy e-bikes, companies have to make them capable of unassisted speeds that are twice as fast as a fit 20 something can maintain for more than 5 minutes of effort, and/or market them like they are 1%ers. I hope the industry doesn’t blow too much of it’s lobbying budget on the ebike issue. I know that acceptance positively impacts their bottom line, but still. Stuff like this only deepens my sense that classes of ebike are pretty meaningless in the real world, no? At the end of the day, these are unlicensed vehicles.

[dasgeh]

@huskerdont 168196 wrote:

Right, but eBikes are becoming more and more common and are looking to be the next big thing, so saying there are only three poor examples right now is only relevant to now, not to the future. That’s why people are discussing what approaches to take toward policies for future trail use. For some of us, current regulations, in addition to being all over the place, appear to be trailing the technology and its likely proliferation. [/quote]

True, though I’ll note that the 3 bad examples have been riding for at least the last 3 years. A lot of “newbies” are riding ebikes, and somehow, we’re not adding the bad examples.

@huskerdont 168196 wrote:

I have yet to see one good argument for allowing the more powerful eBikes on the trails (Class 3 or whatever they will be called.) One person’s argument seems to boil down to “regular bikes can go fast, so why not allow everything on the trails, and more of them because more fast bikes on the trails makes everyone safer,” which is frankly nonsense, and another argument seems to be that faster eBikes (however they’re classified) really aren’t all that fast, which seems to ignore the evidence to the contrary.

My argument is this: Some people will bike only if they can go the speed limits on many roads (i.e. 25 mph), which is possible with Class 3 ebikes. Class 3 ebikes should be allowed on trails FOR NOW because there are many routes that REQUIRE the use of a trail to safely get from A to B on a bike (exhibit A: how do you get to the Memorial Bridge? from anywhere in Virginia). I’m perfectly fine revisiting the policy for Class 3 ebikes after some amount of time to let the infrastructure catch up and to have more data to rely on.

[dasgeh]

@EasyRider 168202 wrote:

I guess it was Class 2…

You’ve made the mistake of importing the California over here, where it doesn’t (yet) apply. We’ve been discussing the California system because many of us think it will become dominant. But it isn’t there yet. The only think that applies across the US is the definition in federal law. Virginia currently has a definition of ebike that doesn’t line up with the California system either.

[Dewey]

@EasyRider 168227 wrote:

lol

The technology is really neat, I enjoyed learning about the sensors.

At the end of the day, these are unlicensed vehicles.

Yeah, at present even Class 1 pedelec riders need to sometimes fly under the radar so why some companies are pretty blatant about selling products like this that clearly fall outside legal ebike definitions doesn’t help. There’s some really helpful info on the web I used for DIY converting a pedal bicycle and learning about the electrical side, but there’s also a lot of chest thumping BS from a minority who want to F this up for everyone including those of us for whom pedal assist has a legitimate application. Respectfully I disagree with your conclusions, ebikes that fall below a state’s defined max power rating are not motor vehicles under the law, we need a classification system so we can prove compliance in the event of a liability case and so we can ride safely on bike infrastructure while following the golden rule/being a PAL.

[EasyRider]

@dasgeh 168230 wrote:

My argument is this: Some people will bike only if they can go the speed limits on many roads (i.e. 25 mph), which is possible with Class 3 ebikes.

I see your point, but I personally don’t feel comfortable endorsing or encouraging the mindset that faster is safer. It’s the opposite. As Vicegrip has pointed out, crashing at 25mph without restraint is very serious. Something like a third of motorcycle accidents involve no other vehicles, and involve speed/loss of control.

Besides that, as a practical matter, scooters are already available that can go at the speed of car traffic, some of them with no license requirements, and at comparable cost to ebikes. So it’s not like there aren’t alternatives.

[Harry Meatmotor]

@dasgeh 168230 wrote:

My argument is this: Some people will bike only if they can go the speed limits on many roads (i.e. 25 mph), which is possible with Class 3 ebikes. Class 3 ebikes should be allowed on trails FOR NOW because there are many routes that REQUIRE the use of a trail to safely get from A to B on a bike (exhibit A: how do you get to the Memorial Bridge? from anywhere in Virginia). I’m perfectly fine revisiting the policy for Class 3 ebikes after some amount of time to let the infrastructure catch up and to have more data to rely on.

I really, really don’t buy this. If you are scared of riding with 25-ish mph vehicle traffic on surface streets, you have no business mixing it up with ped grandma on a MUT at 28mph.

Your idea that turning car drivers into bike riders by adding speed to the cycling mode is flat out dangerous and negligent considering your position in the advisory community.

You still haven’t given an opinion as to why an e-bike rider I see regularly wearing a full face helmet would do so. Does he recognize that the increased speed at which he regularly travels on narrow trails requires greater protection from injury? Could one possibly assume that traveling at speeds higher than average present greater than average danger or possibly require better than average skill to avoid collisions or crashes?

Seriously, you need to drop your advocacy hat and wear a rawlsian veil for just a minute.

[mstone]

@dasgeh 168230 wrote:

My argument is this: Some people will bike only if they can go the speed limits on many roads (i.e. 25 mph), which is possible with Class 3 ebikes.

Honestly, if they believe that, they’re probably better off not biking. You can get seriously hurt going 25+ on a bike if you don’t know what you’re doing.

[huskerdont]

@Harry Meatmotor 168235 wrote:

Seriously, you need to drop your advocacy hat and wear a rawlsian veil for just a minute.

And look at me learning shit on a Friday at work.

Veil of Ignorance:

https://hammeringshield.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/903/

[lordofthemark]

@huskerdont 168248 wrote:

And look at me learning shit on a Friday at work.

Veil of Ignorance:

https://hammeringshield.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/903/

Wait, not everyone had arguments about Rawls and the veil of ignorance late nights in the dorm? I guess these days the young people argue about privilege (but see Rawls!) and identity instead.

[dasgeh]

@Harry Meatmotor 168235 wrote:

I really, really don’t buy this. If you are scared of riding with 25-ish mph vehicle traffic on surface streets, you have no business mixing it up with ped grandma on a MUT at 28mph.

I do not think anyone should be going 28mph on an MUT near pedestrians. Period. Do I need to put that at the end of every post? I also think people are perfectly capable of slowing down to fit conditions — e.g. there’s a dip in the Custis west of the bridge to nowhere. Westbound, if you get up to about 10mph at the top of the hill, pretty much an adult bike can easily hit 28mph at the bottom (I’ve seen someone on a CaBi do it). A lot of people do this so they can carry the speed into the uphill. And yet, when there are pedestrians on the trail heading both directions, people brake going down the hill so they don’t cause crashes. This is why I say that pretty much every bike is capable of these speeds, but we rely on common sense most of the time.

@Harry Meatmotor 168235 wrote:

Your idea that turning car drivers into bike riders by adding speed to the cycling mode is flat out dangerous and negligent considering your position in the advisory community.

You sound like all the naysayers who spoke against Capital Bikeshare. The evidence has not born you out here. More and more people are riding bikes, and they are not dying in droves.

@Harry Meatmotor 168235 wrote:

You still haven’t given an opinion as to why an e-bike rider I see regularly wearing a full face helmet would do so. Does he recognize that the increased speed at which he regularly travels on narrow trails requires greater protection from injury? Could one possibly assume that traveling at speeds higher than average present greater than average danger or possibly require better than average skill to avoid collisions or crashes?

The guy I pass most often wearing a full face helmet is riding a regular ol’ mountain bike – no e assist. I believe I’ve seen the other guy once or twice. I figure both of them are grown ass adults who can make their own decisions. Maybe they also ride motorcycles so this is what’s in their garage. Maybe they don’t like to be cold (my first thought when I saw MTB guy, because it was during the polar vortex a few years back – seemed like a great way to stay warm). Maybe it’s a joke with their S.O.

I completely agree that crashing at 28mph is more dangerous than crashing at 20mph, which is more dangerous than crashing at 15mph, which is more dangerous than crashing at 5mph. Yes, people have to be responsible for their safety when they ride bikes, especially when they’re going fast, whether that speed comes from going downhill or eassist. If you’ve heard my helmet rant, you’ve heard that I think everyone on an ebike should wear a helmet.

But we’re talking about where people riding these bikes should be allowed to go. I’ve explained my reasoning, and you may well disagree. You seem to be disagreeing by bringing up points that would indicate that you don’t think Class 3 ebikes should be on roads, either, which is interesting, and a different position from what most posters have taken. It’s also one I find fairly paternalistic. Do you have any data to back up the need for it? A few have mentioned crash rates for motorcycles, which, of course, can travel much faster than ebikes. Have you looked at crash rates for scooters, which are more limited? Have you looked at the location of motorcycle crashes — are they happening no streets where you’d expect speeds to be under 30mph or over? I haven’t looked at this stuff but would be interested.

Oh, and one clarification: when I say “some people will only bike”, readers seem to assume that these people are inexperienced riders — never touched a bike, but will jump out of their cars for ebikes. I talk to tons of people who bike for recreation — e.g. who are willing to bike on very low volume streets to a trait then bike on a trail. They are experienced riders. They just don’t like riding without the power to accelerate if need be. So they would bike for transportation with an adequate assist (or so they say – these are based on my conversations with folks, which usually start as “them asking whether I biked today”).

[Zack]

Going under the 14th St Bridge, two ebike riders passed. One rang his bell while the other did not call his pass. As the turn to the 14th St Bridge path came into view, I saw the non-pass caller ebike rider fall off, it looked like he took the corner too sharp. I asked if he was okay and he was, humbled perhaps. Karma!

[lordofthemark]

@dasgeh 168250 wrote:

You seem to be disagreeing by bringing up points that would indicate that you don’t think Class 3 ebikes should be on roads, either, which is interesting, and a different position from what most posters have taken.

I am one of the posters who thinks Class 3 ebikes should be on roads. I don’t however think they should be ridden on roads by the kinds of riders who find riding on a road like Quincy or Key at 20MPH to be so intimidating that they would need to take a MUT instead, which is a big part of the case you have presented for allowing class 3 ebikes on MUTs’ I would think the constituency for class 3 ebikes ideally would be “fearless” (not necessarily strong) riders who want to get places faster (but have the streetsmarts to be comfortable if they were slower) and perhaps people who want to be able to pick a route with a 35 or 40MPH speed limit, and prefer to not hold up traffic as much. (It may be there are not many such people, and if so, there may be no huge policy gain to allowing class 3 ebikes on roads – but since there is no danger or even discomfort to that policy to anyone but the (adult) riders themselves, I am not particularly eager to have a ban – after all we allow motorcycles and mopeds on roads- the MUT issue is different – another option, done in parts of Europe, is to require a license plate and/or a motorcycle type helmet for class 3 ebikes)

Neither of those, IMO, require legalizing Class 3 on MUTs (again with the exception, in this area, of the Potomac River bridge issue, which I do not want to revisit) Of course we cannot by legislation prevent sales of class 3 Ebikes to people lacking such streetsmarts. But I don’t think we should use them to justify allowing class 3 ebikes on MUTs.

I want to note one other thing – the California classification does not only impact MUT usage. IIUC, in the Cal law, class 3 ebike riders are mandated to wear helmets regardless of age – while class1 and 2, like human powered, its not mandatory for adults. And in fact minors (under 16) are not allowed to ride a class 3 ebike at all – period.

[Author]

Posts