Statement Regarding Potential CPSC Ebike Law Preemption of 3-class Legislation

Gordon71

Well-Known Member
You mentioned consensus. I can't remember who conducted the survey but 748 bikers were asked about ebike legislation/regulations and 84% stated that they preferred to have one definition for a compliant ebike as a bike. I think most see the class system as nonsense. These days that is a huge majority for any survey.

What if that definition is a bike with a PAS system where the motor is cutoff at 20MPH?
 

Ebiker01

Well-Known Member
Maybe a thread title such as " You will pay registration and insurance for your Class 3 ebike in US soon Unless..."

That will make people do some research and actually read your very informative posts
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
Maybe a thread title such as " You will pay registration and insurance for your Class 3 ebike in US soon Unless..."

That will make people do some research and actually read your very informative posts
Thanks. The funny thing is no one believes that registration and insurance requirements will happen on Class 3 ebikes but if it replaces the federal definition I think it's virtually certain because the same groups behind the effort in Europe are behind the regulatory capture here. I'm a bit shocked that the Europeans have allowed an assist speed limit of just 15mph / 25kph and anything higher is essentially treated as a motorcycle while cars can travel at 300kph on the autobahn (I guess we know where the money and power for legislation resides).

I think what is just beginning to anger me is that we are seeing the country bake under crazy heat most likely due to human impact on the climate and yet some people will work to neuter ebike capability to keep them from getting too many people out of cars. It freaken nuts. The federal definition allows some assist past 20mph but not enough to make LSEBs go outside the traditional speed distribution for bikes and yet some keep saying they are too fast to be bikes. The only difference being a rider doesn't have to be killing themselves to sustain a speed of say 25mph. The world need human scale low cost mobility a hell of lot more than we need the stupid 3 class system that was promoted by People for Bikes who claim to be a bike advocacy group (they were before the merger with BPSA and Larry PIzzi taking over). He chaired 3 class ?model legislation? because he could get money for the organization.
 

Ebiker01

Well-Known Member
I'm a bit shocked that the Europeans have allowed an assist speed limit of just 15mph / 25kph and anything higher is essentially treated as a motorcycle while cars can travel at 300kph on the autobahn (I guess we know where the money and power for legislation resides).


They are a lot more docile over there and well behaved. That's good but with this law they abused people kindness, their pockets 💰 and freedom . But there are also many unregistered Speed Pedelecs as they are called. Is very likley that they will push for this laws in Us too, but when it comes to enforcing i doubt that , it would be doable in the vast land of this country and big cities.

Still the fear factor or just the law itself will get done what this shady corporate groups want UNLESS a change in the present law exactly like you had mentioned is implemented soon !
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
They are a lot more docile over there and well behaved. That's good but with this law they abused people kindness, their pockets 💰 and freedom . But there are also many unregistered Speed Pedelecs as they are called. Is very likley that they will push for this laws in Us too, but when it comes to enforcing i doubt that , it would be doable in the vast land of this country and big cities.

Still the fear factor or just the law itself will get done what this shady corporate groups want UNLESS a change in the present law exactly like you had mentioned is implemented soon !
They are more socially accommodating but their ebike regulations almost go counter to that because they seem to ignore the climate and congestion and accept ebike speed limits that pretty much makes them no better than a traditional bike. They really need more people out of cars as much as we do in the US.

I know that Europe has cracked down on speed hacks to the bikes and the newer models have features that make it virtually impossible to alter the assist limits (as if they don't have more significant issues to focus on). ebikes present a real threat to one of the biggest industries in the world. If people ride 10% they use to drive that is $billions in impact to the auto industry.....then think if 50% was realistic - that would be enough to scare the hell out of auto industry board members who haven't had to think about a real threat for decades. Ebikes are truly the most efficient form of mobility ever created so we should ALL want them to flourish and not allow as you say the "shady corporate groups" to get their way. We should all want one definition of a LSEB and that should be accepted by the states for use as a bike. That will insure the best chance for widespread adoption. I thank you for showing some support as I get beat up a lot on this forum as many think I'm a nut case - I realize whenever you question the status quo you are going to get hammered by those that have drank the koolaid.
 
Last edited:

rawlus

Active Member
Region
USA
having spent a lot of time in the netherlands, i’m not sure a faster ebike is really needed, transportation is predominantly bike not car, bike traffic is a real thing in city centers and there’s a lot of bike congestion so there’s not really much opportunity to go a lot faster than the speed everyone else is going. helmets are also frowned upon/not used so very fast speeds are probably less recommended.
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
having spent a lot of time in the netherlands, i’m not sure a faster ebike is really needed, transportation is predominantly bike not car, bike traffic is a real thing in city centers and there’s a lot of bike congestion so there’s not really much opportunity to go a lot faster than the speed everyone else is going. helmets are also frowned upon/not used so very fast speeds are probably less recommended.
Congestion is a mutually exclusive issue - obviously a 300mph Bugatti can only go as fast as the traffic flow in LA rush hour traffic. You seem to be suggesting that just because some cities have "bike congestion" we should set the assist limits at that lowest possible speed. Sorry but that makes no sense to me because the conditions are controlling the speed bikes can safety go. I have heard this argument many times and it's just not a relevant response in the topic of best regulation performance.

Some riders will have longer commutes and access to road side bike lanes or other infrastructure that would allow safe higher speeds than what is possible in the Netherlands cities. When there is congestion they will just have to slow to what is allowed by the conditions or actual speed limits of the infrastructure being utilized.
 

rawlus

Active Member
Region
USA
i do not personally see the fed definition and the 3 classification based on max speeds as mutually exclusive. they both seem to coexist in multiple states.
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
not relevant to you, you mean.
So you seriously think we should establish ebike assist limits based on bike congestion in a city with one of the highest adoption rates in the world. That would be like do the same with cars based on congestion during rush hour in LA. Netherlands is known for being VERY FLAT overall and the cities are probably the flattest in the world so most people there don't need an ebike with typical riding speeds below 15mph / 25kph due to congestion. Honestly I just think your argument based on the Netherlands riding congestion lacks technical merit.

I could do something like that by saying power limit should be set by what it takes to sustain 15mph with a 200lb rider up the steepest street in San Francisco but I'm just pointing this out to prove a point.
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
i do not personally see the fed definition and the 3 classification based on max speeds as mutually exclusive. they both seem to coexist in multiple states.
No body seems to understand this.... All 3 classes are compliant to the Federal Definition so they can co-exist but the adopting states require compliance to 3-class which federally compliant LSEBs are not. I provided a couple examples in my petition but my guess is no one comprehended the issue. The federal safety agencies control what is compliant for 1st sale so it is a problem that the 3-class states are essentially making many of those compliant products not legal to ride on any public infrastructure in those states. The worse part is the bike shops don't even know they are in some cases selling an ebike non-compliant for use in that state so the buyers are not aware of it. In my opinion that is just a ridiculous situation created entire by the 3-class legislation.

Look up the Izip Express on EBR and read the review. It has a cadence-assist drive system that has no assist cut-off which was legal when it was being sold. I have one and it provides assist past 30mph but it takes significant rider effort of coarse. This is still a federally compliant LSEB but it is illegal for use in any state with the 3-class legislation but I'd bet not one lawmaker or anyone at People for Bikes is aware of this. I tried to provide them the information but they were too busy telling me that they know everything to listen. Look up the bike on EBR and you can verify that what I just wrote is 100% true.

Note: The huge irony with the Izip Express is that I think Larry Pizzi was an executive with Izip when the Express was being sold. He doesn't even remember his own companies products once that lobby money flowed in.
 

rawlus

Active Member
Region
USA
regulating speed of ebikes seems to be the objective of the 3 classifications and to make it easier for municipalities to then control speeds on certain ways using those classifications.

Absent the 3 class system municipalities i’d expect will want to seek a new way to retain this control.

While MPH/KPH speed limits are commonplace on most public roadways these days. bike paths tend not to have speed limit signs in my observation, and enforcement of speed limits requires manpower and tech (= $$$).

Currently class 3 seems to aim to attempt to limit speeds on ways by limiting the bike itself.
On roads with cars speed is limited by controlling the driver.

I’m not sure i want a system where the bike rider is being limited. it feels like a costly and inefficient approach that will end up being paid for by fees, taxes, and other costs imposed on the rider.

i personally do not see a future scenario where we go back to before ebikes went mainstream and society at large just letting ebikes go whatever speed the builder decides and the rider chooses.

since your bikes are all class 3 and prohibited in your municipality (from your earlier posts) why aren’t you just working to get class 3 bikes approved in your municipality? why are you seeking to make this a federal case?

making change and impact at a local level is usually easier and more effective.. find 100 locked-out class 3 bike riders near you, in your community, try not to overwhelm your local leadership with the phd engineering and other crap you post here.

talk to them like human beings, refrain from the condescension and enemy language you use here, build friendships and shared vision.

don’t demonize others who don’t have the exact view you do. maybe don’t drink coffee or energy drinks that day. just be patient, listen WAY more and talk way less.

identify the common ground and be compromise focused. loom for the solution you can all live with. be less black/white on issues. be a good person. respect others. take deep breaths.

at the end of the day these are all “first would problems”. less than 1% of the worlds population can appreciate the irony of the whole situation. we are not curing cancer here.

part of the reason perhaps your cause isn’t getting the traction you think it deserves might be because not many are in your situation or feeling the pain you are. most here are just riding their ebikes it seems. you may need to look harder for people who feel shut out or shut down just like you are.
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
regulating speed of ebikes seems to be the objective of the 3 classifications and to make it easier for municipalities to then control speeds on certain ways using those classifications.

Absent the 3 class system municipalities i’d expect will want to seek a new way to retain this control.

While MPH/KPH speed limits are commonplace on most public roadways these days. bike paths tend not to have speed limit signs in my observation, and enforcement of speed limits requires manpower and tech (= $$$).

Currently class 3 seems to aim to attempt to limit speeds on ways by limiting the bike itself.
On roads with cars speed is limited by controlling the driver.

I’m not sure i want a system where the bike rider is being limited. it feels like a costly and inefficient approach that will end up being paid for by fees, taxes, and other costs imposed on the rider.

i personally do not see a future scenario where we go back to before ebikes went mainstream and society at large just letting ebikes go whatever speed the builder decides and the rider chooses.

since your bikes are all class 3 and prohibited in your municipality (from your earlier posts) why aren’t you just working to get class 3 bikes approved in your municipality? why are you seeking to make this a federal case?

making change and impact at a local level is usually easier and more effective.. find 100 locked-out class 3 bike riders near you, in your community, try not to overwhelm your local leadership with the phd engineering and other crap you post here.

talk to them like human beings, refrain from the condescension and enemy language you use here, build friendships and shared vision.

don’t demonize others who don’t have the exact view you do. maybe don’t drink coffee or energy drinks that day. just be patient, listen WAY more and talk way less.

identify the common ground and be compromise focused. loom for the solution you can all live with. be less black/white on issues. be a good person. respect others. take deep breaths.

at the end of the day these are all “first would problems”. less than 1% of the worlds population can appreciate the irony of the whole situation. we are not curing cancer here.

part of the reason perhaps your cause isn’t getting the traction you think it deserves might be because not many are in your situation or feeling the pain you are. most here are just riding their ebikes it seems. you may need to look harder for people who feel shut out or shut down just like you are.
Assist limits really don't regulate the top speed an ebike will achieve so not sure I get your point. As for a single definition as a bike do you recall any issue that was relevant justifying the push for the 3 class system (keep in mind it's just 8mph differentiation with both assist limits being within the typical riding speed of most road bikes. Nothing about it makes sense or was justified. I know you can be critical of me but have you noticed anyone that doesn't like the idea of dumping 3-class providing and supporting information. All the do is criticize the messenger which is this case is me.

It really doesn't make much sense to work locally to get use allowance for class 3 ebikes while I'm subsequently claiming the 3-class legislation is an interstate commerce violation that should be preempted.

I tend to think bike / ebike speeds are moderated for the simple fact that accidents typically injure the rider most frequently. There is also some trails with speed limits so there is no reason speeds can't be enforced like that just as we do with cars. I think bike speeders will be much more rare than speeders in automobiles.

I never said all my ebikes are Class 3. I purchased all my ebikes prior to the 3-class system gaining much momentum so they were sold as federal definition compliant. Whenever you tell People for Bikes that the assist speed is over 20mph they just say it's a class 3 which is not the case with Polaris Diesel or the Izip Express.

We aren't curing cancer...you are right about that...so that is why I would ask why a bike advocacy group would take lobby money that was intended to dismantle a previous and better definition of a compliant ebike.

I have already said that most are not aware of the regulations and will not care to worry about a registration and insurance requirement on ebikes until it happens and then it's too late. Elimination of 3-class will prevent any chance of that happening because the long legacy of bikes being left alone from those requirements.
 
Last edited:

rawlus

Active Member
Region
USA
i’d disagree, i think elimination of the 3 class system will have the opposite effect and result in far more scrutiny and far more stringent requirements and regulations being issued. because that is sort of the way the world actually works these days. im merely stating an opinion.

what’s your response to the rest of my reply to you? why is it that you are not organizing locally and trying to obtain local relief and local access and then built up in those achieve,ents with a national push? surely your local legislators who benefit directly from your taxes and votes would be more open to listening to a rational argument no?
 

rawlus

Active Member
Region
USA
and if your bikes aren’t class three, then you should have no problem riding them just about anywhere. right?
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
and if your bikes aren’t class three, then you should have no problem riding them just about anywhere. right?
Please read as I have explained this and even asked you to read about the Izip Express.

My Polaris Diesel is 750W but has a throttle assist that functions up to about 25mph. It's fully compliant to the federal LSEB definition and it was compliant to ride in Colorado before 3-class went into effect. Per 3-class no throttle assist ebike can assist past 20mph. I didn't stop ridding it but it's stupid that a brand name ebike became non compliant for use in any state adopting 3 class legislation.

The Izip Express is another ebike I own and it is a cadence-based pedal-assist system that has not cut-off at all. It simply allows the 750W motor to provide as much performance as possible but in reality it's only marginally faster than a typical class 3 ebike (I don't even like referring to an ebike as a class 1, 2, or 3 because I view the regulation as having no real legal standing but it's the only way to communicate the issue). This ebike was used by the LA Police for a couple years and I believe they sold their use one to the public (my guess is they weren't telling the buyers the were not legal to ride on any public infrastructure in California because I believe 3-class had been adopted a bit earlier.

I'm again going to say these are not class 3 ebikes and they are 100% compliant to the federal definition. They are both verifiable models and specifications so I can't just make this up.
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
and if your bikes aren’t class three, then you should have no problem riding them just about anywhere. right?
I ride them as I want but they are not legal to ride in Colorado because they fit in none of the class designations and yet are fully compliant with the federal definition. This really isn't that hard to understand - the federal definition does not require assist cut-offs which are the most brain-dead way to utilize programmable controller technology we have available. Even back in 2002 Currie wouldn't have specified that method because he was technical enough to know how it would feel riding. Have you heard anyone say good things about the way the assist just drops off when you get to 20mph on a Class 1 ebike. I'm sorry but there is no other way to put this but it's a dumb way to address speed and that is being nice.

Very few understand the elegance of Currie's federal definition. He allowed plenty of power below 20mph and then limited power above 20mph to what would sustain 20mph with a 170lb rider on a level surface. That means to go 21 mph the rider just needs to provide the watts to get that extra 1mph. But anyone that understand aerodynamics and it's exponential increase understands that the extra human power needed to add a lot of speed above 20mph goes up quickly. The physics pretty much assure that a federally compliant ebike will be fastest (as has always been the case) when going downhill. Cutting assist at 20mph does not prevent fast speeds going down hill so what really is it's purpose except to create a Class 3 for future registration and insurance as they did in Europe. Anyone that thinks these multi-$billion dollar industries don't want in ebike rider pockets doesn't understand the greed insurance companies possess.
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
and if your bikes aren’t class three, then you should have no problem riding them just about anywhere. right?
Please read as I have explained this and even asked you to read about the Izip Express.

My Polaris Diesel is 750W but has a throttle assist that functions up to about 25mph. It's fully compliant to the federal LSEB definition and it was compliant to ride in Colorado before 3-class went into effect. Per 3-class no throttle assist ebike can assist past 20mph. I didn't stop ridding it but it's stupid that a brand name ebike became non compliant for use in any state adopting 3 class legislation.

The Izip Express is another ebike I own and it is a cadence-based pedal-assist system that has not cut-off at all. It simply allows the 750W motor to provide as much performance as possible but in reality it's only marginally faster than a typical class 3 ebike (I don't even like referring to an ebike as a class 1, 2, or 3 because I view the regulation as having no real legal standing but it's the only way to communicate the issue). This ebike was used by the LA Police for a couple years and I believe they sold their use one to the public (my guess is they weren't telling the buyers the were not legal to ride on any public infrastructure in California because I believe 3-class had been adopted a bit earlier.

I'm again going to say these are not class 3 ebikes and they are 100% compliant to the federal definition. They are both verifiable models and specifications so I can't just make this up.
 

Ken M

Well-Known Member
You mentioned consensus. I can't remember who conducted the survey but 748 bikers were asked about ebike legislation/regulations and 84% stated that they preferred to have one definition for a compliant ebike as a bike. I think most see the class system as nonsense. These days that is a huge majority for any survey.

What if that definition is a bike with a PAS system where the motor is cutoff at 20MPH?
I would guarantee you that any rider that rode both a cut-off programmed ebike and then a governed power ebike per the CPSC definition they would choose the later 100% of the time. Assist cut-offs are brain dead tech given the capability of micro-controllers. That alone should have everyone on this forum supporting my efforts but I get hammered constantly by those claiming I'm trying to harm the industry.

Why would they change the federal definition that has existed for nearly 20 years just because some people think there should be a cut-off (a very technically poor way to address speed concerns) at 20mph?

Dr. Currie understood the merits of governing the power above 20mph to avoid ridiculous assist cut-offs. That is way smarter and I wish others would take the time to actually read HR727 and understand it.

Somehow People for Bikes convinced a lot of ebike riders that cut-offs are the best way to control ebike speed and trying to reverse the influence of that koolaid is not easy.
 

Gordon71

Well-Known Member
I would guarantee you that any rider that rode both a cut-off programmed ebike and then a governed power ebike per the CPSC definition they would choose the later 100% of the time. Assist cut-offs are brain dead tech given the capability of micro-controllers. That alone should have everyone on this forum supporting my efforts but I get hammered constantly by those claiming I'm trying to harm the industry.

Why would they change the federal definition that has existed for nearly 20 years just because some people think there should be a cut-off (a very technically poor way to address speed concerns) at 20mph?

Dr. Currie understood the merits of governing the power above 20mph to avoid ridiculous assist cut-offs. That is way smarter and I wish others would take the time to actually read HR727 and understand it.

Somehow People for Bikes convinced a lot of ebike riders that cut-offs are the best way to control ebike speed and trying to reverse the influence of that koolaid is not easy.
Maybe because the old term "speed kills" comes into play. When more and faster bikes hit the roads there will be more accidents and the faster the bike is going the worse the outcome of those accidents will be. Whenever a product leads to deaths and injuries is when the regulations start to happen. There's no need for a bike to go that fast. If you ride to get to work leave a little earlier.