'70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws • Hacker News Board

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#51

Post by throw0101c » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:36 PM UTC

type0 wrote: post #45

throw0101c wrote: post #13

I personally like the EU rule (168/2013) on e-bikes for this: > pedal cycles with pedal assistance which are equipped with an auxiliary electric motor having a maximum continuous rated power of less than or equal to 250 W, where the output of the motor is cut off when the cyclist stops pedalling and is otherwise progressively reduced and finally cut off before the vehicle speed reaches 25 km/h [15.5 mph] * https://en…

> rated power of less than or equal to 250 W these power ratings are usually incorrect and depending on construction of e-bike might not be enough for good acceleration uphill

I'm happy to quibble about numbers as long as the general principles of (a) needing to peddle to be considered a "bicycle", and (b) being power-limited if you don't want to be considered a 'real' motorcycle, are in there somewhere.

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#52

Post by Dylan16807 » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:36 PM UTC

pizzalife wrote: post #38

Dylan16807 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the point of the weight ratio? If a 20kg motorcycle can do 4kW why is that a concern?

> If a 20kg motorcycle can do 4kW why is that a concern? Because it would go too fast.

The alternative that follows the rule is a 40kg motorcycle that can do 4kW. Is there really going to be a significant speed difference?

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#53

Post by ghaff » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:36 PM UTC

extr wrote: post #27

I have a JackRabbit OG e-bike [0] (really technically an electric scooter, since it doesn't have pedals). I recently put an aftermarket controller on it to allow for speeds past 20mph, and to allow for higher current to the 350W motor (accepting the risk of increased wear and burn out). It's a ton of fun to ride, can get up to 30-35mph or so though I never take it that high (dangerous). I mostly just use the increase…

When I was discussing the issue with someone in a nearby city that is putting in additional protected bike lanes, she said that they asked about enforcement of high-speed ebike speeds in a meeting and the city official basically shrugged and said nope.

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#54

Post by potato3732842 » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:39 PM UTC

nluken wrote: post #48

hnuser123456 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a class 3 ebike, so 20mph throttle-only, 28mph if you pretend to pedal for whatever reason. The requirement to pedal is more dangerous than the speed. It's fast, but on a long, straight, paved path, it's not that scary, and I wanted to go faster. If I could just throttle it up to 35mph, I wouldn't even need bike lanes around town. 45mph, and I could easily get to the next town over. It's a lighter, slower, che…

> If I could just throttle it up to 35mph, I wouldn't even need bike lanes around town. 45mph, and I could easily get to the next town over. The "higher class" of which you speak has existed for a long time, albeit usually fulfilled by gas powered vehicles until recently: https://www.vespa.com/us_EN/models/primavera/primavera-50-4s... There's a reason why we require license, registration, and insurance to operate mop…

>There's a reason why we require license, registration, and insurance to operate mopeds but not bicycles

Pedestrian dander is a stupid red herring. When cyclists ride in the road they are at most equal danger to pedestrians as the cars in the road.

That reason mopeds are neutered by regulation is that the Karens of yesteryear didn't like the noises they made. A few dumb people riding them on the sidewalk was just the pretext.

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#55

Post by Dylan16807 » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:39 PM UTC

throw0101c wrote: post #47

Dylan16807 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the point of the weight ratio? If a 20kg motorcycle can do 4kW why is that a concern?

The latest generation of RAV4 has power of 176 kW (236 hp; 239 PS): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4#Sixth_generation_(... A fairly recent iteration of BMW S1000RR motorcycle has 152 kW (204 hp; 207 PS): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_S1000RR#2019_(K_67) * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_mot... One can set lap records, the other cannot. Power-to-weight can determine performanc…

I don't think you can compare a car and a motorcycle that easily. Especially at high speeds where air resistance is so important.

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#56

Post by RhysU » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:40 PM UTC

zaphar wrote: post #36

RhysU wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capability is a poor metric. Bicycles go downhill real damn fast. The top speed of a bicycle is largely limited by how foolish the person atop it is and the local geography. Bicycles can be geared to go across the salt flats real damn fast. The top speed of a bicycle is largely limited by how foolish the person atop it is and the local geography. Bicycles, even without crazy geography or gearing, can be ridden real d…

Anything on wheels is going to go downhill real fast. Terminal velocity under gravity is not what we use for classifying vehicles because it doesn't serve as a useful bucket because it's not a feature of the average mechanism of propulsion. And that's the part we care about. The presence of top athletes doesn't change the average users experience of the vehicle.

So, if I put a pro rider on a bicycle you're cool with me having them scream around crowded areas?

Traffic regulations are fundamentally about tail events. Most of the time, vehicular traffic is boring.

The right metric is kinetic energy. But, it'd be unpopular for speed limits to depend upon vehicle mass. Or, in the case of bicycles vehicle and rider mass since the rider mass isn't negligible.

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#57

Post by BizarroLand » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:41 PM UTC

I bought a 2000 watt dual motor ebike for ~$700 online.

It's internally governed to have a max speed of 35 mph, and while that is technically illegal and I could technically defeat that governor and go faster, actually going 35 on a bicycle, even on normal roads, is pretty stressful.

That's a lot of force to be putting on some thin steel tubes.

I feel like laws to require licensing and to limit where you can ride ebikes above a certain weight class will save a lot of stupid people like myself from gross injury or death.

That being said, I hope they don't take them away, because they are a lot of fun in the right context. Being able to bike 25 miles and still have the oomph to power up the hills near my house is fantastic, and occasionally, in safe conditions, being able to move 35mph is fun and helpful.

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#58

Post by arp242 » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:42 PM UTC

rib3ye wrote: post #6

zaphar wrote: post #2

That's not an e-bike. That's an electric motorcycle.

Take a look at the Super73 mentioned in the piece: It has pedals directly connected to a chain. That's the difference between a motorcycle and an e-bike, not speed. Edit: I am not saying these things aren't crazy fast and dangerous, but if you go into an electric motorcycle store and they try to sell you an e-bike with a pedal assist, it's obvious they are not the same thing. The form-factor is just different.

Super73's own webpage advertises it as a "high performance electric motorbike".

I don't know what the strict legal definition is and I'll take your word for it that "pedals directly connected to a chain" is the one. However, for all intents and purposes in every-day conversation, "electric motorcycle" seems accurate to me.

These things are between 27 and 37kg, depending on the model. You can cycle them, but it's obviously not really intended to any normal use. The chain is a useful backup (or perhaps a legal loophole, or maybe a bit of both). I think that legal definition is perhaps outdated and should be updated.

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#59

Post by RhysU » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:42 PM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #39

RhysU wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capability is a poor metric. Bicycles go downhill real damn fast. The top speed of a bicycle is largely limited by how foolish the person atop it is and the local geography. Bicycles can be geared to go across the salt flats real damn fast. The top speed of a bicycle is largely limited by how foolish the person atop it is and the local geography. Bicycles, even without crazy geography or gearing, can be ridden real d…

How fast can a normal person riding a normal-style bike with modified gears go across the salt flats? I feel like it's obvious that capability would be measured with a fixed level of user input on a fixed course/dynamo.

2018 had one pro rider do 183 MPH per https://www.bikeradar.com/news/cycling-land-speed-record-sma...

I'd wager most weekend spandex warriors could break 100 MPH peak.

Re: '70 MPH e-bikes' prompt one US state to change its laws

#60

Post by californical » Wed, Jul 30, 2025, 5:44 PM UTC

nicoburns wrote: post #43

californical wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think that a sweeping speed limit ban is helpful. FWIW, I don’t own an e-bike and have only borrowed them from other people a few times. In the more rural, even suburban areas, it might be totally safe, even safer to go 25-30mph instead of 20, if you’re on a road with 35mph car traffic. I agree with you for major cities, I’ve had to deal with the antisocial people who rip through crowds.. but a sweeping ban l…

I think higher speeds should be allowed, but they should be liscensed like any other motocycle (perhaps they're their own class with their own rules, but they should be registered with a license).

I can hit that speed on a regular bike with a good wind, which is perfectly legal. Adding an extra licensing step could slow the adoption of people switching from cars to e-bikes for commutes (a very positive step in my opinion).

A coworker of mine has a medium-speed e-bike, maybe goes 25-30mph in the (mostly empty) bike lane of a 45mph road for a lot of the journey. Tries to take 35mph side roads for the rest. It’s a very suburban/stroad-y area.

His commute is about 4-5 miles, so he gets to work in ~10 minutes. This is a great solution for all - less cars, more efficient vehicle, less stressful for him not needing to drive.

Any impediment to that reduces the likelihood of other people catching on to what he does.

Maybe those medium-speed e-bikes should have a license in the same way as a fishing license. It’s trivial to obtain, but if you violate certain rules, the license acts as a means to revoke your privileges. I’d be perfectly ok with that.