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

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

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 114 posts

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

#91

Post by [deleted] »

zaphar wrote: post #79
RhysU wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Reckless endangerment covers the case of pro-riders being idiots. Classification of the vehicle should rely on the vehicle's properties instead of the operators capabilities.

[deleted]

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

#92

Post by RhysU »

zaphar wrote: post #79
RhysU wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Reckless endangerment covers the case of pro-riders being idiots. Classification of the vehicle should rely on the vehicle's properties instead of the operators capabilities.

Agreed.

However, that shark is jumped as soon as the classification criteria involve operator-dependent properties like maximum speed of a bicycle. It has no operator-agnostic answer.

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

#93

Post by vjvjvjvjghv »

RhysU wrote: post #19
vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good question. I think this makes sense. The distinction between bike and motorcycle should be based on capability. So if you reduce the speed of a motorcycle you could argue that it’s a bike now.

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…

I am not 100% sure but I think Pogacar goes a little faster than the average cyclist.

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

#95

Post by saltcured »

californical wrote: post #60
nicoburns wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Does that bike lane go next to parked cars? You can imagine that even conscientious drivers could fail to see a bike approaching that fast and open their door into its path.

I admit I rode my bike up to 35-45 MPH sometimes in my youth, just with pedaling and gravity. But, I was wise enough to realize I belong in a normal traffic lane at that point, not flying along the edge near pedestrians, parked cars, etc. And I wasn't exceeding the posted speed limit for that road.

I had a less wise friend, with a very aerodynamic road bike, who hit ~60 MPH (in a 25 MPH zone) and T-boned a car because they did not consider unsafe it was with the limited sight lines. I felt sorry for the driver who, by all accounts, didn't do anything wrong.

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

#96

Post by zamadatix »

californical wrote: post #60
nicoburns wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Bringing these points back to ones made in the previous comments:

- Is there a meaningful difference of some people being able to actively hit 30 mph vs everyone being able to passively go 30 mph the whole way

- Should vehicles capable of those speeds just be licensed in some way based on that rather than whether or not they have an ICE and 4 wheels

- Is there a way to separate the classifications so devices which are more truly "e-bike" in typical speed do not need to follow the same regulations as something more "electronic motorcycle".

Your friend going to work and back bike lanes and streets at 30 mph sounds a lot closer to the "electronic motorcycle" side of things, so doesn't necessarily say one thing or the other about more truly "e-bike" types of devices or why they should be considered the same.

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

#97

Post by senkora »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #17
rib3ye wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This is not true, and may fool a casual glance but legally is not classified as a bicycle. The difference is if it has a throttle or is pedal assist. No one is hitting 30 mph on these things without a throttle

I have an (unmodified) Super73. There is a mode selection between pedal assist and throttle. You can hit 28mph with only pedal assist.

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

#98

Post by dcsommer »

daft_pink wrote: post #80
habosa wrote: post #18

I ride my ebike to work every day. I love it, it's a lot more convenient than my old manual bike was (more durable, less sweating in hilly SF). I really try hard to be conscientious and not do anything on it that a very strong normal cyclist wouldn't/couldn't do. I almost never have any occasion to top 20mph on it, except maybe when going down a steep hill. I don't want to advocate for more regulations on biking but…

FYI, there are actual laws setting limits on bikes. Generally most places in the USA will allow a Class 1 or Class 2 e-bike to be ridden anywhere a bike can be ridden legally and some allow Class 3 with more restrictions. Class 1 is pedal assist maximum 20 mph assisted and class 2 throttle assist up to 20 mph with pedal assist allowed and if you pedal harder yourself it’s okay. Class 3 is pedal assist up to 28 mph, b…

Enforcement needs to be on the sales side, as enforcement at the consumer level is obviously impossible to scale. Also, class 2 (and 3) should not be allowed in bike lanes. If you have a throttle, you're not a bike; you're a motorcycle or moped. I see a clear difference in awareness and safety between pedal and throttle usage.

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

#99

Post by dzhiurgis »

habosa wrote: post #18

I ride my ebike to work every day. I love it, it's a lot more convenient than my old manual bike was (more durable, less sweating in hilly SF). I really try hard to be conscientious and not do anything on it that a very strong normal cyclist wouldn't/couldn't do. I almost never have any occasion to top 20mph on it, except maybe when going down a steep hill. I don't want to advocate for more regulations on biking but…

IMO better to enforce the rules (no idea how) since there will be always rule breakers and I'd legit want a fast bike when driving among the cars on main road (i.e. where there are no bike lanes).

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

#100

Post by dzhiurgis »

zaphar wrote: post #79
RhysU wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Reckless endangerment covers the case of pro-riders being idiots. Classification of the vehicle should rely on the vehicle's properties instead of the operators capabilities.

> Reckless endangerment

So maybe we can enforce that part a little better.

If I tried to drive a car on pedestrian path at even 10kmh I'd be chased by police helicopter and appear on national news.

Post reply on HN