Another "e-bike" death

[matticus]

I think an important step is to start making delivery companies like Deliveroo insist that all bikes used for deliveries are road legal. It strikes me that if they did their bit there would be a much smaller market for them.

That seems entirely sensible ... but then consider that for decades, delivery companies have legally employed learner [moped] drivers! It's crazy, but totally accetped ...

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Isn’t delivering pizzas 🍕 part of the moped test these days?

 

[Vantage]

So your bike is illegal with a 1000w motor then ? By a factor of four ! Even if limited, don't go having an accident on it, you could end up in trouble.

The dibble would have a hard time proving it's illegal. Even a legal 250w bike's motor is capable of much more. My last motor whilst limited to 250w often hit near 600w in acceleration or hill climbing. 250w is the continuous limit, not the actual real limit.
Tbh, my current motor is somewhere closer to 1200w so near 5 times the limit 😂

 

[icowden]

It's not your average bicycle

It's not a bicycle at all.

 

[icowden]

The dibble would have a hard time proving it's illegal. Even a legal 250w bike's motor is capable of much more. My last motor whilst limited to 250w often hit near 600w in acceleration or hill climbing. 250w is the continuous limit, not the actual real limit.
Tbh, my current motor is somewhere closer to 1200w so near 5 times the limit 😂

Why? Your EAPC must show the power output or the manufacturer of the motor. EIther would prove that your bike was illegal. It must also show the battery voltage or maximum speed of the bike. Further the maximum power output must be 250 watts and it should not be capable of propelling the bicycle more than 15.5mph. The dibble could fairly easily measure all of those things. If your last bike hit 600w in acceleration or hill climbing, it wasn't legal either unless you had it taxed and insured and were wearing a helmet.

 

[Vantage]

Why? Your EAPC must show the power output or the manufacturer of the motor. EIther would prove that your bike was illegal. It must also show the battery voltage or maximum speed of the bike. Further the maximum power output must be 250 watts and it should not be capable of propelling the bicycle more than 15.5mph. The dibble could fairly easily measure all of those things. If your last bike hit 600w in acceleration or hill climbing, it wasn't legal either unless you had it taxed and insured and were wearing a helmet.

Nope. I'm afraid you're wrong on the power limit.

 

[icowden]

Nope. I'm afraid you're wrong on the power limit.

Not according to the Government:-
https://www.gov.uk/electric-bike-rules

 

[Pale Rider]

Why? Your EAPC must show the power output or the manufacturer of the motor. EIther would prove that your bike was illegal. It must also show the battery voltage or maximum speed of the bike. Further the maximum power output must be 250 watts and it should not be capable of propelling the bicycle more than 15.5mph. The dibble could fairly easily measure all of those things. If your last bike hit 600w in acceleration or hill climbing, it wasn't legal either unless you had it taxed and insured and were wearing a helmet.

There are a few, er, inaccuracies in this post.

The legal limit is 250w 'nominal', but the law realises it cannot defeat the laws of physics, so it accepts such motors will be capable of much higher peak output, typically around 700w.

If there are requirements to stamp the wattage on the motor, such restrictions are routinely ignored.

Bafang are now a major manufacturer of hub and crank motors.

Their 750w hub motor is popular because it's cheap and powerful, but it is unmarked.

The suspicion must be that Bafang deliberately produce the motor in this way to appeal to the European market.

I'm satisfied Bosch have sold me a legal crank motor.

Once again, it is unmarked.

I accept it might be stamped somewhere, but you would have to dismantle the motor to find it.

 

[Profpointy]

Yes - this would help
it is basically giving ll legal (and nearly legal) ebikes a bad name

the way things are going someone in Parliament will feel it is necessary to "reform" the regulations
i.e. insurance, helmets, reg plates - maybe even MOT and "road tax"

which will, of course, fix the problem totally because all the numpties on the 5 million W motors will immediately lock them up and start riding a Raleigh Motus instead with full legal compliance

I give it a week

Given someone upthread proposed exactly that ...

 

[Jody]

It's not a bicycle at all.

That's been my point all the way through this thread.

 

[chris667]

but then consider that for decades, delivery companies have legally employed learner [moped] drivers!

Yes, but mopeds have registrations, helmets and insurance. I think a sur-ron has much more in common with a motorcycle and ought to be taxed and insured as such.

 

[Profpointy]

Knives is another one, although we do now have an age restriction which sort of works in shops, but is almost impossible to police online.

Don't agree with that. Almost everyone buying knives or similar online has a credit card or equivalent so apart from the odd exception is old enough. Making it harder and more costly to buy knives, and presumably woodwork tools and such is helping no one.

Any young yobbo wanting a knife could swipe one from his Mum's kitchen. It's unlikely he'll be buying a hundred quid Sabbattier

 

[Pale Rider]

Don't agree with that. Almost everyone buying knives or similar online has a credit card or equivalent so apart from the odd exception is old enough

The Rambo style knives and other sharp weapons clearly designed to look flash and rip flesh, rather than dice a carrot, are mostly bought online because the yobbos know they might struggle to buy at the few bricks and mortar retailers.

I think it most unlikely many under 16s have no access to internet shopping, even if they just get an older mate to order and pay him the cash.

Further, banks are heavily marketing accounts aimed at a younger audience.

 

[Profpointy]

The Rambo style knives and other sharp weapons clearly designed to look flash and rip flesh, rather than dice a carrot, are mostly bought online because the yobbos know they might struggle to buy at the few bricks and mortar retailers.

I think it most unlikely many under 16s have no access to internet shopping, even if they just get an older mate to order and pay him the cash.

Further, banks are heavily marketing accounts aimed at a younger audience.

Isn't it less bad for a yobbo to buy a silly film prop than a kitchen knife which would be a genuine lethal weapon?

In any case how does making it more expensive for me to buy good quality knives help anyone?

I can't even buy or sell knives on ebay any more.

 

[figbat]

There are a few, er, inaccuracies in this post.

The legal limit is 250w 'nominal', but the law realises it cannot defeat the laws of physics, so it accepts such motors will be capable of much higher peak output, typically around 700w.

If there are requirements to stamp the wattage on the motor, such restrictions are routinely ignored.

Bafang are now a major manufacturer of hub and crank motors.

Their 750w hub motor is popular because it's cheap and powerful, but it is unmarked.

The suspicion must be that Bafang deliberately produce the motor in this way to appeal to the European market.

I'm satisfied Bosch have sold me a legal crank motor.

Once again, it is unmarked.

I accept it might be stamped somewhere, but you would have to dismantle the motor to find it.

Let's look at the actual legislation rather than various paraphrasing articles.

The original, The Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles Regulations 1983, has been amended by The Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles (Amendment)
Regulations 2015. In it, it states (my bold):

"(4) In regulation 4— ​

(a) paragraph (a) is omitted; and ​

(b) in paragraph (c)— ​

(i) for sub-paragraph (i), substitute— ​

“(i) has a maximum continuous rated power which does not exceed 250 watts;”; ​

and ​

(ii) in sub-paragraph (ii), for “15”, substitute “15.5”.​

It also goes on to state:

“5.—(1) For the purposes of regulation 4(c)(i), “maximum continuous rated power” has ​

the same meaning as in Regulation (EU) No 168/2013(a) of the European Parliament and of ​

the Council of 15th January 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of two- or threewheel vehicles and quadricycles(b).​

So let's go take a look at REGULATION (EU) No 168/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 15 January 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of two- or three-wheel vehicles and quadricycles, specifically Article 3 - Definitions:

(35) ‘maximum continuous rated power’ means the maximum ​

thirty minutes power at the output shaft of an electric ​

engine as set out in UNECE regulation No 85.​

The UNECE regulation No 85 document is quite involved and less easy to snip quotes from, but knock yourself out.