Thinking strongly about ordering the CCX

#41
The concept of bike path policing is almost comical. Here in my city we have people parking in front of fire hydrants all day and single-occupant HOV lane drivers the norm rather than the exception as the Highway Patrol zooms by with more important things to attend to. Going 5mph faster than the limit on a bicycle on a MUP and testing top peak wattage at any given time on a bicycle motor while in the field isn't going to happen. Ever.
 

bikerjohn

Active Member
#42
So there are a couple of points relative to safety I'd like to make. As others have mentioned if you are riding on the road then keeping up with traffic affords some degree of safety, as cars are not rapidly overtaking you...
Also, for comparison sake; the highest speed I have reached on my road bike is 55mph, the highest speed on my CCS is 42. It is incumbent on the rider/driver to control the bike/vehicle they are operating safely within the conditions they are traveling...
...The guy riding the bike is still responsible for its safe operation.
If I had hit someone on my road bike when I was bombing down a canyon road at 55, would anyone really think the bike maker was at fault?
Also, back to the original subject; the CCS felt very stable, safe, and comfortable riding downhill at 42 mph. :D
-Bottom line here is: "The guy riding the bike is still responsible for its safe operation."

I remember well the day I reached a screaming 45+ mph down hill speed on a country road in South Bristol, NY. That speed was all about gravity and momentum, with my 230+ pound physique on a 30 pound Bianchi Road bike with rim brakes. https://bikejournal.com/blog.asp?rname=bikerjohn&cdate=9/7/2013
 

Bruce Arnold

Well-Known Member
#43
With a doctorate in the mental health field, I often have the experience of hearing intelligent people discuss mental health issues in ways that make perfect sense and sound very logical ... And are totally, completely, mind-numbingly wrong.

We've got exactly one lawyer chiming in on this thread. Thanks for your input, @Merc. I'm going with what you've said.

As to the rest of the comments: "Huh. Wouldja look at that."
 
#46
I have a bachelors degree in common sense and a masters in BS detection. Sometimes in life 1+1 doesn't always = 2 though. I think if your riding your bike and obeying the laws no one will mess with you. Here on the bike paths speed limits are posted at 10/15mph. The spandex crowd are the ones always violating it and causing problems. What's ironic to me is the liberal crowd wants things to go all green/electric yet they're the ones wanting to limit/ban ebikes. Boulder county is talking about banning them all together on their bike paths. Denver is next. Look at Seattle, Portland and NYC.
 
Last edited:
#48
Wow! That's a $300 full-face helmet. I've cycled for years with $80 Giro helmets. Often I can (could) average 20+ mph with downhills over 40mph+. Wearing kit attire. My helmet did save me when hit by a car as it hit the curb - and HARD. My first thought was "I'd be dead without this thing" and still probably was concussed. I never ride without it. I can see falling into a false sense of security riding along at 25mph on the road. To hit that speed on my road bike I would need a slight downhill, tailwind and be spinning my legs off in top gear and I would be well aware that I was really moving.
Road bike helmets can be dangerous. The multiplicity of vents tends to concentrate point loads. You might have been dead without your road helmet, but you might have been less dead with a multisport helmet
 

Timpo

Active Member
#51
With a doctorate in the mental health field, I often have the experience of hearing intelligent people discuss mental health issues in ways that make perfect sense and sound very logical ... And are totally, completely, mind-numbingly wrong.

We've got exactly one lawyer chiming in on this thread. Thanks for your input, @Merc. I'm going with what you've said.

As to the rest of the comments: "Huh. Wouldja look at that."
Did you see Marc's quote?
I am still in the dark about this.

The CCX is not illegal in California. I live in California and did a lot of research on this very specific issue.

California has the most progressive electric bike laws in the country.

@Mike’s E-Bikes, you are completely wrong on claiming the bike is illegal.

CA Vehicle Code §312.5 states an ebike is defined as a bicycle equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts.

VC 312.5(1) Class 1 is an ebike that provides assistance only when pedaling with max speed of 20 mph.
VC 312.5(2) Class 2 is an ebike that is throttle-assisted with max speed 20 mph.
VC 312.5(3) Class 3 is a speed pedelac with 28 mph max speed.

All of Juiced Bikes fall within CA ebike laws with the exception of the HF 1100 and the Hyper Scrambler because these 2 bikes have a 1000 watt motor and receive motor assistance beyond 28 mph. These specific bikes fall within the moped classification under the CA vehicle code and therefore require an M1 or M2 dreiver’s license, one time registration.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=312.5.&lawCode=VEH
I'm not saying Marc was lying, nor am I saying he is not aware of the law. But is he fully aware of the CCX spec?
He clearly stated that HF or Hyper Scrambler are not legal due to the fact that they assist beyond 28mph, which is exactly what CCX does.
Unless the word "1000W 'and' beyond 28mph" was the key, I don't know why CCX is legal.

VC 312.5(3) Class 3 is a speed pedelac with 28 mph max speed.
From what I understand, the CCX's max speed is approximately 33mph or 35mph, which Mike has been arguing about.

the larger problem here is the CCX as its being sold, is absolutely illegal, unless you get it licensed as a moped, and you won't be able to get it licensed as one due to the other safety equipment it lacks, and the specific fact it doesn't have a VIN number or a title. Obviously the company can have disclaimers out the ying yang, but as soon as someone faceplants themselves onto the front of a vehicle on one of these, and is exceeding the 28 mph speed limit with the assistance of the motor, assuming they live to tell about it, their lawyers will have a field day in court. Worse, this gets in the papers, then gives ebikes a bad name, and then ultimately worse case we could see far stricter laws (back to 15 MPH max like in many EU countries) that will ruin it for the rest of us. Any company that is willing to sell into these risks, is kidding themselves, and in the end, the lack of ethics in business, ends up hurting a whole lot of innocent bystanders. So if you want it to ride 'offroad' which from their videos it doesn't look like its meant to do, you are simply supporting a firm that is gambling on a number of levels, not the least of which are ebike riders lives. Certainly the 'boost' provides a competitive 'edge' versus reputable firms like Giant or a Trek, who stick to staying within the laws because they are big and their lawyers wont let them. But cutting corners like this to gain more sales versus what another ebike might offer, and a company that does that, makes one wonder where else along the line are cutting corners being done, whether its in the ebike components, or ultimately how they can support service when something goes wrong, and will they actually do the right thing in obvious situations where the right thing needs to be done. This is not a judgement call. These are simply questions that people should ask themselves when evaluating any ebike and any company. The company may not be breaking any laws, but the product is not designed to follow what is out there, unless they strictly expect to only be sold to people who only will use it on private property. Wink, wink's, and nod nod's, don't count folks.
Not trying to start a new argument, no disrespect to anyone. But I am actually confused about this.

https://www.juicedbikes.com/products/hyperfat-hf1100
The HF1100 description says
  • Due to the high power motor and high speeds, this bike is designed for non-public roads only.
But not on CCX, so I guess CCX is the legal?
 
Last edited:
#52
@Timpo Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough. Look to the link I had attached with the California law that literally defines what is a legal ebike. The definition is not dependent on the max speed of the bike but rather the motor. If your bike is electrically powered with a motor that is not more than 750 watts, it’s a legal ebike. If the ebike has a motor above that, like the HF1100 and the Hyper Scrambler with their 1000 watt motors, it is not considered an ebike and thus the reason they advertise that it is for non-public use.

What you see Tora doing on the video is demonstrating that the CCX is capable of being used on non-public roads (he's demonstrating this in China I have no idea what the law is there) with the motor assisting you beyond 28mph, but it obviously requires the rider to assist at maximum level too (Tora is an Olympian) and can never really sustained a speed over 34 mph from my recollection. If the rider were to use it in this manner on a CA bike path, the rider would be ticketed, but the bike manufacturer would not be in violation of any law (the officer would have to prove the motor was assisting the rider beyond 28 mph, independent of the speed the bike was traveling). If the rider were to be involved in an accident using it in this manner, the rider would be directly liable for any injury caused. The rider could cross claim Juiced and any other victim injured in the accident could do the same as well, but more likely than not any claims against Juiced would be vitiated by the rider's conduct in operating the bicycle in such a negligent manner.

The Hyper lines are advertised for non public roads. These bikes are not ebikes. Most likely they fall within the moped laws although they don't fit the definition. I would assume a judge would conclude, due to how fast it goes just with the throttle alone, that it would qualify as such and require an M1 or M2 license and one time registration and cannot be used on bike paths or sidewalks like a bike.

Bottom line the CCX is a legal ebike.
 

Timpo

Active Member
#53
@Timpo Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough. Look to the link I had attached with the California law that literally defines what is a legal ebike. The definition is not dependent on the max speed of the bike but rather the motor. If your bike is electrically powered with a motor that is not more than 750 watts, it’s a legal ebike. If the ebike has a motor above that, like the HF1100 and the Hyper Scrambler with their 1000 watt motors, it is not considered an ebike and thus the reason they advertise that it is for non-public use.

What you see Tora doing on the video is demonstrating that the CCX is capable of being used on non-public roads (he's demonstrating this in China I have no idea what the law is there) with the motor assisting you beyond 28mph, but it obviously requires the rider to assist at maximum level too (Tora is an Olympian) and can never really sustained a speed over 34 mph from my recollection. If the rider were to use it in this manner on a CA bike path, the rider would be ticketed, but the bike manufacturer would not be in violation of any law (the officer would have to prove the motor was assisting the rider beyond 28 mph, independent of the speed the bike was traveling). If the rider were to be involved in an accident using it in this manner, the rider would be directly liable for any injury caused. The rider could cross claim Juiced and any other victim injured in the accident could do the same as well, but more likely than not any claims against Juiced would be vitiated by the rider's conduct in operating the bicycle in such a negligent manner.

The Hyper lines are advertised for non public roads. These bikes are not ebikes. Most likely they fall within the moped laws although they don't fit the definition. I would assume a judge would conclude, due to how fast it goes just with the throttle alone, that it would qualify as such and require an M1 or M2 license and one time registration and cannot be used on bike paths or sidewalks like a bike.

Bottom line the CCX is a legal ebike.
Thank you very much for taking your time and replying to my question.
To be honest, I am still not clear..

I actually did read the California legislation on the link you provided.

Here's what I found from your link:

312.5. (3) A “class 3 electric bicycle,” or “speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 28 miles per hour, and equipped with a speedometer.

I was confused about the fact that CCX could provide assistance beyond 28mph, but the law says it couldn't. But from what I read from your explanation, it sounds like whether or not Juiced will be liable is different matter.
I know you're a lawyer who already looked into this matter, and I'm just an average Joe.. I know the law is very complex so I know I didn't fully understand everything. o_O

I will just take your professional advice and conclude that CCX is legal on the road. Thanks!