e-Bikes – Let’s talk
- This topic has 1,364 replies, 117 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
@Dewey 174705 wrote:
It’s not illegal to ride an ebike on the bridge travel lanes but not something that I feel comfortable doing on my <20mph 250w Class 1 pedelec in the absence of a striped bicycle lane. Honestly for a few dollars of paint Memorial Bridge can stand going on a road diet, it shouldn't take much away from the money congress has promised for the refurb, this was suggested by WABA a few years ago but was rejected by NPS with no reason given. DDOT appears to be backtracking on widening the sidewalk on Roosevelt bridge in the upcoming bridge works, and won't paint a bike lane on Key. The sidewalk paths are at present the only way I feel safe crossing the Potomac bridges so I would very much appreciate it be made legal for Class 1 and 2 ebikes. If you feel otherwise you are entitled to that opinion but then please agree with a reasonable accommodation like a bike lane on Memorial or Key if you believe that slower Class 1 and 2 ebike commuters must ride in the road.
Yeah, this probably serves reiterating, since my stance above was maybe not very clear, but I certainly support class 1 & 2 ebikes being allowed on any MUPs to include sidewalks on the bridges, etc. I think it’s hard to imagine how these are a trail hazard and clearly they enable transportation for all sorts of additional cyclists — from families with box bikes to people that just need (or want) to get to work with less exertion. I don’t think anyone on the forum has any issue with these e-assist bikes that are riding with others at normal [cyclist] commuter speeds. The only sticky issue — to me, anyway — with e-bike legality are the e-bikes that are clearly designed to go much faster (and are being ridden much faster) than the type-1 or type-2 e-bikes. The argument here has been that these 28+ mph bikes are necessary to ride comfortably in traffic, which is why I commented that I’m all for them riding in traffic across the bridges.
(I think the prevailing counter-argument here is that enforcement would be too difficult, so we can only have an all-or-nothing policy. I’d still vote to have the rules even if I knew it was unlikely they’d be enforced. There would hopefully at least be some market encouragement to push the MUP-legal bikes.)
@hozn 174710 wrote:
Yeah, this probably serves reiterating, since my stance above was maybe not very clear, but I certainly support class 1 & 2 ebikes being allowed on any MUPs to include sidewalks on the bridges, etc. I think it’s hard to imagine how these are a trail hazard and clearly they enable transportation for all sorts of additional cyclists — from families with box bikes to people that just need (or want) to get to work with less exertion. I don’t think anyone on the forum has any issue with these e-assist bikes that are riding with others at normal [cyclist] commuter speeds. The only sticky issue — to me, anyway — with e-bike legality are the e-bikes that are clearly designed to go much faster (and are being ridden much faster) than the type-1 or type-2 e-bikes. The argument here has been that these 28+ mph bikes are necessary to ride comfortably in traffic, which is why I commented that I’m all for them riding in traffic across the bridges.
(I think the prevailing counter-argument here is that enforcement would be too difficult, so we can only have an all-or-nothing policy. I’d still vote to have the rules even if I knew it was unlikely they’d be enforced. There would hopefully at least be some market encouragement to push the MUP-legal bikes.)
As far as I know all current laws that ban or allow certain classes of ebikes, or ebikes in general, apply to MUTs and MUPs and “sidewalks” indiscriminately (where biking of any kind is allowed on the sidewalk). I am not sure that is the optimal policy regarding class 1 ebikes. I see a strong argument for allowing them on MUTs, even not so wide MUTs like the MVT. But I would be very leary to have them on many sidewalks where human powered bikes are now allowed. In the case of the bridge crossings, I am not sure they belong equally on all the sidepaths. Of the existing ones, TR (narrow but lightly used?) and Memorial may be the best. 14th street is narrow and crowded, but gets a lot of human powered cyclists going too fast anyway. Where I would most want to see DC retain a ban would be on the Key Bridge. Of course it would be great to see seg infra, but I know little about the issues with lane widths and space opportunities on that bridge (or Memorial).
@hozn 174721 wrote:
E-bikes are still allowed in FS.
I am gonna have FUN with that Jump bike code then
@dkel 174732 wrote:
Here’s a diversion: someone asked me today if my bike is an e-bike. It’s not the first time it’s happened. Here’s the rear hub:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]16927[/ATTACH]
Does this look like one of those e-hubs? Is it because of the belt drive? It’s a steel frame with pretty average tubing, so it’s not as if it looks like it has a battery on it. What’s the deal? More importantly, how offended should I be? I’d like to think they ask me because they can’t believe how fast I’m going by on my heavy commuting rig, but…I’ve gotten that too…a few times on my previous bike (belt drive with Alfine
and quite a few more with my belt drive/Pinion gearbox combo.For the few people who did more than just ask the question in passing: they had that thought because of either (a) belt drive/hub/gearbox looked different and they’d been hearing about those e-bike things so thought that would be it or (b) they knew motorcycles that use belts (one guy who asked actually was on a motorcycle) so made the false mental connection that belt = motor because all bicycles use chains.
@hozn 174710 wrote:
Yeah, this probably serves reiterating, since my stance above was maybe not very clear, but I certainly support class 1 & 2 ebikes being allowed on any MUPs to include sidewalks on the bridges, etc. I think it’s hard to imagine how these are a trail hazard and clearly they enable transportation for all sorts of additional cyclists — from families with box bikes to people that just need (or want) to get to work with less exertion. I don’t think anyone on the forum has any issue with these e-assist bikes that are riding with others at normal [cyclist] commuter speeds. The only sticky issue — to me, anyway — with e-bike legality are the e-bikes that are clearly designed to go much faster (and are being ridden much faster) than the type-1 or type-2 e-bikes. The argument here has been that these 28+ mph bikes are necessary to ride comfortably in traffic, which is why I commented that I’m all for them riding in traffic across the bridges.
(I think the prevailing counter-argument here is that enforcement would be too difficult, so we can only have an all-or-nothing policy. I’d still vote to have the rules even if I knew it was unlikely they’d be enforced. There would hopefully at least be some market encouragement to push the MUP-legal bikes.)
1) My argument is that allowing ebikes with a speed limiter up to 28 (not +) gives MORE people the comfort to ride in traffic. Which means (1) more people riding in general (because some will have to ride on streets, and won’t bike without the extra speed), and (2) fewer ebikes taking the trails when there is an alternative (because some will use Class 1 if that’s all that’s allowed on trails, but won’t feel comfortable in traffic, so will stay on the trails when there are alternatives).
2) There’s generally a problem with these definitions. At least some places limit Class 1 to 250W, which isn’t going to get a fully loaded cargo bike (or heavy trike) anywhere near 20mph (on uphills/flats). And the Class 1/2 definitions don’t allow for the Bionx-type pedal-and-throttle, which is SO important for starting and stopping with load, and getting up to speed in traffic/up hills, etc.
@Judd 174709 wrote:
I don’t want you riding a Class 1 pedelec on these bridges without dedicated infrastructure either. The eBikes that I’ve ridden (almost all class 1) are zippy, but I wouldn’t take them on Memorial or Key Bridge unless it was my only option, since they won’t get you up to the same speed as traffic.
For folks that haven’t ever tried an e-bike, I highly recommend signing up for a Jump account. If you use offer code JUMP4WABA, you’ll get two free rides. Riding a Jump has helped shape and moderate my opinion on where e-bikes fit in the mix of transportation options and infrastructure.
Have you tried other systems? Have you tried a Bionx? Have you ridden a cargo bike with a 250W motor? With a 750W? 1000W? A regular bike with those?
From one perspective, they are all very similar. They all give you a boost, and you have to think a little more about controlling your speed to be safe (honestly, like being on a manual bike on downhills, but all the time). You also have less invested in that speed, so slowing doesn’t feel so sad.
But from another perspective, particularly for those of us towing precious cargo or with other mobility restrictions, there are some big differences:
1) Throttle. Try starting from a stop on a hill with 3 kids on your bike. With a car bearing down behind you. Or try being mobility impaired on an e-trike, starting from a stop with a car bearing down behind you. The throttle is key to getting from 0mph to 10mph in these situations.2)Power. Again, try going uphill with 3 kids on your bike, or your overweight self on your trike with 250W. Ha.
As I’ve said so many times here, to make any bikes usable as a transportation option in this area, they have to be able to get to all the destinations people need transportation to. That includes some monster hills. That also includes so routes where the only safe way to get there is the trail/sidepath.
The way to make biking work for everyone is to allow the tools that allow everyone to bike on the routes people need to bike on. And we need the trails to work for everyone, so REGULATE BEHAVIOR, because plenty of folks on manual bikes are very dangerous (high speed, close passes, blind passes, etc).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.