"It still looks like a scooter"

pxpaulx

Well-Known Member
If he took the pedals off, I would agree it is not a bike. Those scooter variations don't further the e-bike cause at all. And I am one of the ones that don't mind the throttle being there, even if I don't use it myself. I'd like to see one of those things be pedaled!
 

J.R.

Well-Known Member
If he took the pedals off, I would agree it is not a bike. Those scooter variations don't further the e-bike cause at all. And I am one of the ones that don't mind the throttle being there, even if I don't use it myself. I'd like to see one of those things be pedaled!
I sat on one like it once at a park and I would guess the cranks are 30% wider than a bicycle. I'm not small and there's no way I would try to pedal one, it would trash your knees and low back.
 

pxpaulx

Well-Known Member
I sat on one like it once at a park and I would guess the cranks are 30% wider than a bicycle. I'm not small and there's no way I would try to pedal one, it would trash your knees and low back.

The bothersome point, and why it seems to irk people, is that the pedals are clearly added to these scooters as a condition to meet a legal requirement, and not actually intended for use. Perhaps to prevent these being sold as e-bikes there could be some sort of clause to state an e-bike must fit the form and function of a bicycle (including recumbent styles). More specifically perhaps you could exclude vehicles with an alternate platform to rest the rider's feet from being defined as an e-bike.
 
Last edited:

Brambor

Well-Known Member
people will always try to cheat it and try to create a technicality that will exclude them from being considered a moped. However the clear and defining detail is the throttle. If this thing goes without pedaling it's not a bicycle.
 

stevenast

Well-Known Member
People like this are going to going to get us all banned from trails.

I said this in another forum, public perception does matter.
 

Brambor

Well-Known Member
Maybe so. I mean I want those machines to exist and I get why some people are into them. But the classification should reflect the type. IMHO
 

Paul E.

Active Member
However the clear and defining detail is the throttle. If this thing goes without pedaling it's not a bicycle.

Highly illogical. If a lightweight e-bike with a 200W motor has a throttle, does that make it not a bicycle? If you remove the throttle from a Harley and add pedals that you turn to make it accelerate, does that make it a bicycle?

Classifying vehicles by their power and weight instead of which body part you wiggle to make it move would make sense.
 

Brambor

Well-Known Member
Not sure if I left out some obvious words or you guys are just unhappy I don't consider throttle riding part of a bicycle. Seems pretty logical to me but I don't need to convince anyone. I'm just having an opinion. Sorry. :)
 

stevenast

Well-Known Member
Just added pedals to my Kawasaki....hard as hell to pedal but the throttle function is a blast, lol.

Sorta funny, but really off point.

E-bike use will be navigating some dangerous waters in the next few years ...it's a serious topic.
 

stevenast

Well-Known Member
Classifying vehicles by their power and weight instead of which body part you wiggle to make it move would make sense.

By common definition, a bicycle moves by human power and the mechanical advantage of the cranks and gears and wheels ONLY.

E-bikes are attempting to expand that, but as I said above we have some convincing to do in order to be allowed to use bike paths etc...