Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Long Range E-Bike

jacquesmattheij.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 626 posts

Re: Show HN: Long Range E-Bike

#51

Post by jacquesm »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #47
ralusek wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not cool at all with basically motorbikes getting a free pass because they're disguised as bicycles Why? Seems like a pointless distinction in regards to any sort of rules. Surely where they're allowed to operate, for example, should be based on things like speed and weight, rather than "whether or not the operator is moving their legs in a circular motion."

Read jacquesm's reply to my comment: there are people hacking their pedelec so that they accelerate without you pedaling and that's illegal. I think it's a good thing it's illegal. I do also believe only pedelec are allowed on bike lane in Belgium/Brussels. A bicycle which you can use without using the pedals is, to me, not the definition of a bicycle. > Surely where they're allowed to operate, for example, should be…

That and there are fixed maximum ratios between the pedal input and motor assist.

Re: Show HN: Long Range E-Bike

#52

Post by jacquesm »

Tostino wrote: post #50
ralusek wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not cool at all with basically motorbikes getting a free pass because they're disguised as bicycles Why? Seems like a pointless distinction in regards to any sort of rules. Surely where they're allowed to operate, for example, should be based on things like speed and weight, rather than "whether or not the operator is moving their legs in a circular motion."

Yeah that argument for forcing pedaling to me seems like a way of gatekeeping to keep something a little more "pure" without any actual reason.

Not really, without the pedals it's no longer a bicycle but a moped. We have e-mopeds already and there are plenty of rules for those.

Re: Show HN: Long Range E-Bike

#54

Post by jacquesm »

aeharding wrote: post #46
stevesearer wrote: post #10

We have a pretty good network of fire roads in the southern Los Padres National Forest. Several times recently I have seen hunters and campers using E-Bikes to extend their range into the forest. From what I can tell they use a cargo trailer for gear as well as extra batteries. It will be interesting to see what other uses being find for E-Bikes as ranges increase.

> From what I can tell they use a cargo trailer for gear as well as extra batteries. This is the main reason if you might ever buy multiple ebikes in your household, buy a drivetrain brand that has generic, swappable batteries that can work on all your ebikes. Buying batteries is expensive (~$1,000 for Bosch). For example, some ebikes don't have swappable batteries (either they're integrated or are a no-name brand).…

If you can charge your batteries up to 60% when you store them for a longer time rather than 100%, then charge to 100% just before you need them. That will keep them around that much longer. Better still if you can avoid discharging them below 15% soc.

Re: Show HN: Long Range E-Bike

#56

Post by timerol »

> I traced it down to the several KA welding pulse that caused the ground fault interruptor to be EMP’d. Running the welder without ground took care of that.

That's a solution, I suppose. Not one that I would pursue, but I'm glad the author got the pack welded without any injury.

Re: Show HN: Long Range E-Bike

#57

Post by ralusek »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #47
ralusek wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not cool at all with basically motorbikes getting a free pass because they're disguised as bicycles Why? Seems like a pointless distinction in regards to any sort of rules. Surely where they're allowed to operate, for example, should be based on things like speed and weight, rather than "whether or not the operator is moving their legs in a circular motion."

Read jacquesm's reply to my comment: there are people hacking their pedelec so that they accelerate without you pedaling and that's illegal. I think it's a good thing it's illegal. I do also believe only pedelec are allowed on bike lane in Belgium/Brussels. A bicycle which you can use without using the pedals is, to me, not the definition of a bicycle. > Surely where they're allowed to operate, for example, should be…

> A bicycle which you can use without using the pedals is, to me, not the definition of a bicycle.

My point is what difference does it make? Like I said, if you want to cap weight or speed, or maybe acceleration, within given areas, fine. But who cares whether or not you classify it as a "bicycle." If a person wants to exercise on their way to work or get there in a suit without having to shower, I don't care.

Re: Show HN: Long Range E-Bike

#58

Post by 0des »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #27

We really need a terminology to differentiate better between pedal-assist only e-bikes ("pedelec") and electric motorbikes. A "bicycle" that can accelerate without the need to pedal at all is an electric motorcycle, no matter if you put pedal on it or not. I see the two as totally different things: I've tried pedal-assist e-bike and they're great. But... Although I have nothing against motorbikes I'm not cool at all…

The laws where I live do not see it this way. If it has pedals, and is under 750 watts, then it is an e-bike. This includes the ability to use a mid-drive motor that supplies 750 watts but makes full use of the bicycle's gearing system.

Re: Show HN: Long Range E-Bike

#60

Post by jacquesm »

ralusek wrote: post #57
TacticalCoder wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read jacquesm's reply to my comment: there are people hacking their pedelec so that they accelerate without you pedaling and that's illegal. I think it's a good thing it's illegal. I do also believe only pedelec are allowed on bike lane in Belgium/Brussels. A bicycle which you can use without using the pedals is, to me, not the definition of a bicycle. > Surely where they're allowed to operate, for example, should be…

> A bicycle which you can use without using the pedals is, to me, not the definition of a bicycle. My point is what difference does it make? Like I said, if you want to cap weight or speed, or maybe acceleration, within given areas, fine. But who cares whether or not you classify it as a "bicycle." If a person wants to exercise on their way to work or get there in a suit without having to shower, I don't care.

We do have scooters, it's just a different class of vehicle.
Post reply on HN