This article is ... odd. Some of the wording doesn't make a lot of sense. An example: " (Time of year not weather indication were not cited).".
From what I can gather, 60 participants were given an electric bike for 10 weeks, and around 50% later went on to buy the bike they were given. Usage was 60% at the beginning, dropping to 28% by the end.
So half or greater of the people who purchased a bike weren't even using it.
My employer did similar trial (I ended up buying the bike and now I do around 30% commute by bike).
I don't think you can expect high percentage from people that are not obsessed with cycling - and those already use regular bike. E.g. I need to be home early 2 days/week to drive my kids to classes, sometimes I need to go to grocery store after the work, on some days there's dentist, weather, etc. So the drop in the usage is expected.
There's your lycra brigade guys who will always think adding $1,000 worth of electric drive gear to a $500 bike is cheating, but spending $10,000 on an ultra-light carbon fiber frame with ultra-low-rolling-resistance tyres is totally legitimate.
But then there's also people who start off with an electric bike and love how convenient, cheap and easy they are. I have a couple of friends who've got e-bikes and use them as regular transport.
My understanding was that the rule is around safety - i.e. they didn't want people pushing the limits at the risk of failure. There's calls for it to be scrapped, now that we know more about the limits of carbon fibre.
An electric bike doesn't have to mean no pedaling - they can just offer enough assistance to make a long or hilly commute doable, or just make an average commute doable daily by a non-athletic person.
Even if you are cycling for the exercise benefits, you could do the same exercise and just do more. My usual mtb rute include a large climb and downhill after, with the electric bike I could do 2 climbs with 2 downhills. Someone said, with the e-bike instead of having fun just going downhill, you have fun uphill and downhill.
I didn't mean to imply that all serious cyclists were male, and I should also draw the distinction between 'serious cyclists' and 'lycra brigade' - the latter (in the sense that I'm using it) refers to the groups of usually-overweight usually-over-50 usually-male cyclists who dress up in racing gear to ride their $10k bikes a few hundred meters down to the local coffee shop to scoff donuts. :P
If you're actually competing against other cyclists then I do understand the desire for fancy expensive bikes. If you're cycling for fun or fitness, though, it always struck me as being like paying extra for the high tech light-weight dumbells...
Contrariwise, those e-bikes which are rigged up to make you pedal a little bit so you feel like you're doing exercise strike me as pose-y. Just get an electric motorbike and be done with it. :P
I am a guy, btw, but I'm trying to get my wife (and hopefully daughter) into cycling. So anything I can do to break that stereotype is awesome. But I saw your smiley face, and I get the joke =).
My wife's first bike was some monstrosity from Kmart (a discount big-box store in Australia). It was heavy (> 12kg), and a burden to ride. It seriously discouraged my wife from riding.
However, the next one I got her was much lighter, and I hope make it easier for her to get started.
To be honest, I never considered electric bikes much, but I might bring it up with her next time.
Personally - I cycle to commute - so lightness is good - but I also do it for exercise, so I do want to pedal. And if you want added weight - it's not hard - just pack some extra water in your backpack =). But you can't go the other way (i.e. shed weight, if you bought a heavy bike).
On the contrary. My household is cycling obsessed and we bought a 250W electric commuter this year. It won't displace our carbon fibre / titanium race machines, but it is tremendous fun to ride around casually or to commute on.
They are comparatively expensive, though. I expect to see a drop in price as popularity grows, since bicycle manufacturing is a volume game.
I picked up my RadRover a year ago for ~$1,300. Considering the price of 'serious' bikes, it's quite cheap. A motor hides the dual sins of fat tires and heavy frames quite well!
A person who likes biking might get one for friends/SO/family seniors who might join but don't bike regularly. Or to use when you have a kid or 30 kg of groceries in the trailer.
(An obsessed person probably doesn't have non-biking friends/SO...)
I'm a cycling nut and I quite like electric bikes, although I've never tried one.
One of my best rides ever was racing an electric bike up a local 8km climb. I was fitter and my bike was lighter, but he had a motor. Everytime the road got steep I'd catch him up but then on the flatter parts his weight wasn't a hindrance and all I could do was draft. It was awesome.
I'm pretty much a regular biker and have lots of friends who are also cycling (mountainbike as well as road bike). Some years ago the opinion about ebikes was really somewhat negative. But I felt that this has changed, and ebikes are now mostly seen as something positive.
I personally think they are a great alternative for commuting. E.g. they allow for making a boring 20km single-way commute without getting exhausted, and saving the energy for any other activity/sports which might be more interesting for their user. They also make cycling more accessible for older and handicapped users. All those factors reduce the usage of cars where they are not really needed, which is a good thing.
There are still some fears around ebikes in the mountainbike community. E.g. that they make hard trails high up in the mountain too easily accessible for people without the required fitness and cycling skills. Which could cause them problems for getting down again without crashes. Another fear is that the increased trail usage and speed through ebikes might cause these to wear out faster.
So, you've been riding with a group of friends for decades, and your health is deteriorating so you can't keep up with them anymore. Do you:
- drop out of the group and stop cycling?
- every outing, require them to drop down to your speed?
- get a bike that gives you some assistance, so that you can keep up with them?
Similarly, if your speed drops due to age, do you stop making those regular rides to a friend or your favorite cafe, or do you get a bike that helps you a bit?
I know at least a couple of people how are pretty serious about biking (as in fairly regularly take part in amateur road and mountain bike races), but who also ride electric bikes for their daily commute since they are so easy and convenient and you get to work without having broken a sweat.
You can use it occasionally. I have colleagues who only cycle to work once per week. That's still a 20% reduction in traffic and will probably still bring health benefits.
The usage refers to the trial only. Here's the quote from the original article [1]:
"Usage of the e-Bikes for commuting remained high for the duration of the Albany trial, peaking at 60 per cent in the first week, before dropping to 28 per cent by week nine.
But the uptake in cycling was sustained even after the trial finished.
One in two participants enjoyed riding their e-Bike so much they purchased it once the trial finished. "
It's great to see a historically car focused org trying to replace cars with bikes! It sounds like a pretty incredible organization — curious what the Western Australians here think.
I haven't lived in WA for a while now but I always thought of the RAC as kind of a default roadside assistance and insurance provider.
There are plenty of other providers and with a little effort I can recall some of their names but when thinking about car insurance RAC springs to mind immediately.
Last time I lived in Australia I owned an electric bike and not a car and it was great. I would rent a car maybe once or twice a year for a long road trip but would otherwise just stick to my bike.
We have a similar climate to the US west coast with only a few weeks of rain a year, relatively flat landscape and way too many cars per person (due to public transport and distance).
It’s pretty common to drive very short distances to pickup something small. I’m sorely guilty of it.
One reason I avoid cycling is that I feel it’s somewhat risky. I lost a close friend in high school who got knocked down by a drunk driver. More bikes on the road raises awareness, so a net positive imho.
Also checking in from Perth. I'm a bit cynical about our RAC, I know it more for its insurance products, especially Home & Contents, Life & Pet insurance. It doesn't feel like a car organization.
However, they do have some cool things. There's a charging station for electric cars at the RAC offices, and they launched a trial of an autonomous electric shuttle bus:
Personally, I don't own a car, I'm 95% public transport (with the remainder being Uber, with the cost savings I tend to use Uber Black rather than UberX). Most places I need to go to are on the train line, a short bus ride away, or within walking distance.
how many were cyclist before this study? I would assume most. Usage surely has to be weather dependent. I just find studies like this to be highly contrived and too short to have actual real value in their predictions.
Did you find information of average length of trip, number per day, and such?
Also Zero Motorcycles are starting to have interesting models here. check them out if you're interested in electric motorcycles. I requested a quote for their 2017 models, waiting on a response.
The biggest problem I see restricting the uptake of e-Bikes for urban transport is the risk of theft.
You really need secure bike parking at both ends of the journey given that these are typically $1000+ machines - locks are no obstacle for a determined bike thief!
A cheap push-bike, on the other hand, you can feel comfortable parking on almost any street - which is really what makes a bike so convenient in the first place.
Better security/anti-theft technology needed. Needs to be effective and convenient!
Crappy ones don't get stolen. I lived in an area with rampant bike theft, had 3 bikes stolen, and bought a crappy bike. I didn't even bother locking it most of the time. I sold it when I moved, after 2 years of pretty much daily use.
I knew someone that had a pretty decent bike and he purposely made it look crap. He put loads of crappy stickers on it, wrapped different parts of it with different coloured tape etc. Not sure did it actually change anything, but it has never been stolen.
There's a counter intuitive effect with high grade bikes. They often have a unique look (frame, colors, tires...). If (IF) the bike is quickly moved far from its original city, other bikers will notice it whenever someone uses it again. Often on bikers board you can read stories of users helping each other out.
A generic bike on the other hand .. less chances to be noticed (by definition).
It's really about the ratio of chain thickness to bike crappiness. In general, I'd say anything that requires an angle grinder (serious chain, good U-lock type locks) is fine for most bikes. I'd say the same criteria apply to E-bikes.
You do have to make sure you're attaching your bike to something solid, though.
A friend of mine had welded a small basket, grinded parts of the frame and let them rust, engraved his name on an old bike for commuting, even with a thick motorcycle chain it got stolen.
It's not very useful debating this, without giving an area.
Rates of bicycle theft vary widely between countries, cities, and sometimes within cities (poor area / rich area, centre / suburbs, residential area / university campus).
Yes but limiting yourself to a crappy bike is depressing. You've giving in to fear of thieves. They have "stolen" your good bike ride, and you're okay with that?
Having a good quality bike makes riding more enjoyable, safer, more comfortable, more efficient.
A bicycle that looks like hammered shit doesn't necessarily make for a bad ride. Initial quality is largely irrelevant if:
0. It's suited to the task (a Wal-Mart mountain bike is lousy for running around town)
1. Stuff degrades gracefully (cheap index shifting generally does not; friction shifters are a far better choice on a cheap bike)
2. You maintain it.
3. You take the time (and money) to find a comfortable saddle for it.
Crappy bikes become unfun when they're neglected. Unfortunately, they usually get neglected because they were poorly suited for the intended purpose anyway, or because people don't want to pay a bike shop to tune up a $150 bicycle (which was probably poorly assembled in the first place).
This is a case where learning to do the work yourself pays the dividend of both raising the competence of the user and resulting in a useful tool for years to come.
Most people would be much better served by an old 10-speed than a new crappy mountain bike. They're better suited to getting around town, immensely tolerant of neglect because there isn't anything that truly needs to be in top shape to run, and easy to put right.
And yes, I say this as somebody who has a nice road bike, a nice mountain bike, and a road bike that lives outside all year long, looks like hell and that I wouldn't hesitate to ride 15-25 km.
Tell that to my now missing mall brand all plastic low grade mountain bike. It had the lowest value possible; I took the seat, and I parked it because one pedal was failing that day. Not even pretty (blue/white/fluopink) It was at best worth the frame metal.
Doesn't seem to be the case in London. I have a £300 bike (price when it was new, now probably worth much less) and use two secure locks (£35 each). It's outside every night and over several years, the only thing that's been stolen was my saddle once.
Colleagues of mine with e-bikes or other, more expensive, bikes had parts stolen much more frequently.
There's always the risk of vandalism but I guess most thefts will know what an item is worth on ebay, they won't bother about a bike they could only get £50 for.
That's the concern with e-bikes, their battery is probably already worth stealing.
In Vancouver, I often see homeless bums with tattered clothes ride nice bikes. Trek, Giant, Specialized and such, with decent grade components: not bottom end crap.
Are you sure there isn't already some effective anti-theft protection for electric bikes? The one I've seen have a quickly removable control unit on the steering handle. Without it, you can't use the bike.
I think ebikes are therefore less prone to theft than regular bikes.
Most ebikes have a pop-out battery (with lock). It's not a very attractive target of theft without the most expensive part: stolen bikes trade for peanuts. But yes, there's room for more anti-theft solutions.
Also, many/most places don't have a bad bike theft problem. Locks are no obstacles for determined house/motorbike/etc thieves either, but people still use those.
It's actually a curious result (though not surprising, based on experience). Ebikes are just a very light and low power motorbike.
We have motorbikes. There are obviously huge downsides to an ebike relative to an motorbike. They're faster, for instance.
I think a big part of the story is that ebikes are just fun to ride, aside from practicalities like travel time. This is kind of a weird conclusion, for a tranport policy person to digets. It can't be quantified and charted. What are they supposed to do with it?
This makes me curious about other things. Would a super-light, 4 wheel vehicles also be fun? What would a transport system look like if fun was the major guiding principle?
I commute by both motorbike and (push) bike. Pushbike has some nonobvious advantages IME:
* You can ride in the breakdown lane which is way less stressful than lane-splitting on the motorbike.
* You can take off-road shortcuts between suburbs which is fun and saves loads of time.
* Maintenance when you commute by motorbike costs a fortune! Tyres, chains, and valve shims cost thousands a year. Way more than a car.
I seriously considered buying an e-bike for commuting to work (I'm in Australia too). The biggest obstacle for me are the laws. We follow the euro laws (max 250 watts, and max 25km/h). The power is fine for a skinny-tire road bike, but you really need more for a suspension bike. Our roads aren't as nice as europe - you really want to ride a dual suspension mountain bike. Also my commute is 40 KM each way (very common), so you really want to be travelling faster than 25! I imagine people in europe don't commute that far. So it doesn't look to me like the rules work particularly well for us, at least it swung me against buying one personally.
what you write makes complete sense, but there is the other side - these fast bikes are completely silent, and according to my fiancee who is a doctor there is a surge of very grave injuries done by people on e-bikes who are becoming more like motorbikes, but completely silent.
so what you describe is great, but would require similar/same driving license as some weaker type of motorbikes, with plates, registration etc. are you willing to go through this?
I've got a 1000W bike which is ridden off road for 95% of my commute.
I've found when I kick the limiter in on my controller box, I don't have anywhere near enough power to assist with getting up hills. The 25km/h limit probably wouldn't be so bad on its own, its the 250W limit that makes things very awkward.
I have a 2000W bike in China, I modified it from a legal 800W bike. It goes 80 with the limiter off but I don't get to use it in non urban environments much.
I have tried commuting on an e-bike and it worked really well but I would still like the top speed to be increased to about 30 km/h (could be 33 km/h to match the US rules of 20 mph).
In Sweden there is a secondary class of bikes that can have motor support up to 45 km/h but those require an insurance that costs a lot of money. And they eat batteries, those has to get better.
I begin to notice the voltage drop after about 8 miles and have to throttle back to stop the controller unit cutting out.
Its enough to get me to and from work on one charge though.
I can get up to 30mph on my bike but I stay slower just out of concern for pedestrians. I always slow down to a crawl when passing people, especially those who are walking dogs just to be on the safe side.
Sadly there are those who insist on bombing down the footpath at full throttle who spoil it for the rest of us.
I think whatever the rules are, you'll always run into a barrier like the one you're describing.
Longer distances, higher speed, more weight.... At some (arbitrary) point there's a classification change that puts you in motorbike category.
I think outer suburb commutes in large Australian cities will always push that category. As you say, you need more speed, range, suspension. These add weight, require more saftey measures.
To cover these use cases, we probably need a new light/electric motorbike category, with its own rules.
We have those restrictions because before them, people would ride too fast on bicycle lanes, causing a danger to real cyclists. I'm not sure what you're complaining about, it seems what you need is an electric (or not) moped, of which there are many. I hope you're not expecting to be able to use bike lanes going 40 or 50 km/h.
At least they get some use, for some reason various adminstrations where I live think it's a good idea to place bike lanes with concrete curbs on an alredy narrow european road.
Not only they waste space, but they are empty most of the day and pro cyclists eschew them for the road.
I'm riding mostly on the shoulder of highways where there are no pedestrians and rarely other bikes. I'm happy to have bike speed limits, eg 25 around pedestrians, 50 on the highway shoulder. I already do 55-65 for long downhill stretches as it is on my unpowered road bike, it's bliss :)
Why not just get a moped then? Doesn't even need to be electric. A small capacity petrol moped is going to be super cheap to operate and decently clean.
Being in Australia, I believe you have the legendary postie bikes.
I definitely ride my conventional bicycle up to 30kmph+ in bicycle lanes, both separated and beside the road. I think 25km/h is simply too low. I do think anything over 40kmph is getting silly however. You may as well be on a petrol scooter at that point.
I also have no idea why they insist on it being pedal assisted rather than throttle based. The regulation states that you have to be pedalling for it to engage the motor, so you can't just engage the electric motor on it's own.
Such a regulation really limits the possible kits and bicycles you can purchase, as the Australian market seems to be lagging behind the rest of the world and the options are fewer.
Well he can keep peddling beyond 25, the motor just doesn't assist past that speed. If road is flat, this would be easy enough.
I'm guessing by "conventional bicycle" you don't mean a mountain bike. Try riding a mountain bike at 30+, it feels wrong. Your whole posture is too upright, it's not designed for speed. Not easy to reach 30 on a mountain bike without going downhill.
I ride my mountain bike 30+ all the time, it feels fine. It definitely makes me a bit more sweaty, but is a sustainable speed for a few kilometres at least especially if there is a bit of a slope.
Your mindset of the power assist might be different from what the regulation 25 km/h ebike embodies. It's meant to help you uphill or keep moving forward with low effort, not boost your speed while you put in a lot of physical exercise.
(in Europe you can get 45 km/h pedelecs too, but you may need traffic insurance and be banned from bike lanes)
> "The biggest obstacle for me are the laws (max 250 watts, and max 25km/h)"
25 km/h on a dual suspension mountain bike is fast enough. Have you ever ridden a mountain bike at this speed? It feels fast. Lots of wind, lots of speed, lots of focus needed, and if you fall off at that speed... OUCH.
Imagine you could increase that limit to 30 or 35 km/h. You are now travelling VERY fast for a mountain bike on a bike path. Too fast in my opinion. Those paths are often shared. Hitting or clipping someone at 30 km/h won't be pretty.
Besides, there's nothing stopping you pedalling faster than 25, the motor stops assisting, but you easily push past that if you pedal in top gear. The motors are efficient enough now that 250 watts will get you to 25 even for a mountain bike.
In Germany you can get faster ebikes that can do 45km/h. There are some legal requirements for them (need to get insurance, a license plate and wear a helmet) but nothing too serious. Is it the same in Australia?
85 comments
[ 408 ms ] story [ 212 ms ] threadFrom what I can gather, 60 participants were given an electric bike for 10 weeks, and around 50% later went on to buy the bike they were given. Usage was 60% at the beginning, dropping to 28% by the end.
So half or greater of the people who purchased a bike weren't even using it.
I don't think you can expect high percentage from people that are not obsessed with cycling - and those already use regular bike. E.g. I need to be home early 2 days/week to drive my kids to classes, sometimes I need to go to grocery store after the work, on some days there's dentist, weather, etc. So the drop in the usage is expected.
All the cycling nuts I know consider them to be heresy...
Most of the cycling nuts who consider them heresy are weekend warriors who've never ridden a daily 14 mile commute in the winter.
But then there's also people who start off with an electric bike and love how convenient, cheap and easy they are. I have a couple of friends who've got e-bikes and use them as regular transport.
One will get you banned from the Tour de France - the other will not...
I confess I'm one of the lycra brigade people (they're not all guys!), and have spent money on trying to save those couple of extra grams.
However, for me, I like cycling also for the exercise benefits - and using an electric monitor would remove all those benefits.
Although for somebody who doesn't want to pedal - I think they're great! You get many of the benefits, without arriving as sweaty.
UCI regulations state a minimum weight for a bicycle of 6.8 kilos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racing_bicycle#UCI_rules)
Fortunately, I don't race in UCI events, haha.
My understanding was that the rule is around safety - i.e. they didn't want people pushing the limits at the risk of failure. There's calls for it to be scrapped, now that we know more about the limits of carbon fibre.
If you're actually competing against other cyclists then I do understand the desire for fancy expensive bikes. If you're cycling for fun or fitness, though, it always struck me as being like paying extra for the high tech light-weight dumbells...
Contrariwise, those e-bikes which are rigged up to make you pedal a little bit so you feel like you're doing exercise strike me as pose-y. Just get an electric motorbike and be done with it. :P
I am a guy, btw, but I'm trying to get my wife (and hopefully daughter) into cycling. So anything I can do to break that stereotype is awesome. But I saw your smiley face, and I get the joke =).
My wife's first bike was some monstrosity from Kmart (a discount big-box store in Australia). It was heavy (> 12kg), and a burden to ride. It seriously discouraged my wife from riding.
However, the next one I got her was much lighter, and I hope make it easier for her to get started.
To be honest, I never considered electric bikes much, but I might bring it up with her next time.
Personally - I cycle to commute - so lightness is good - but I also do it for exercise, so I do want to pedal. And if you want added weight - it's not hard - just pack some extra water in your backpack =). But you can't go the other way (i.e. shed weight, if you bought a heavy bike).
They are comparatively expensive, though. I expect to see a drop in price as popularity grows, since bicycle manufacturing is a volume game.
(An obsessed person probably doesn't have non-biking friends/SO...)
One of my best rides ever was racing an electric bike up a local 8km climb. I was fitter and my bike was lighter, but he had a motor. Everytime the road got steep I'd catch him up but then on the flatter parts his weight wasn't a hindrance and all I could do was draft. It was awesome.
I don't like seeing eBike times on Strava though.
I personally think they are a great alternative for commuting. E.g. they allow for making a boring 20km single-way commute without getting exhausted, and saving the energy for any other activity/sports which might be more interesting for their user. They also make cycling more accessible for older and handicapped users. All those factors reduce the usage of cars where they are not really needed, which is a good thing.
There are still some fears around ebikes in the mountainbike community. E.g. that they make hard trails high up in the mountain too easily accessible for people without the required fitness and cycling skills. Which could cause them problems for getting down again without crashes. Another fear is that the increased trail usage and speed through ebikes might cause these to wear out faster.
- drop out of the group and stop cycling?
- every outing, require them to drop down to your speed?
- get a bike that gives you some assistance, so that you can keep up with them?
Similarly, if your speed drops due to age, do you stop making those regular rides to a friend or your favorite cafe, or do you get a bike that helps you a bit?
"Usage of the e-Bikes for commuting remained high for the duration of the Albany trial, peaking at 60 per cent in the first week, before dropping to 28 per cent by week nine.
But the uptake in cycling was sustained even after the trial finished.
One in two participants enjoyed riding their e-Bike so much they purchased it once the trial finished. "
[1] http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/electric-bike-trial-in-per...
I cycle almost every day, I just feel this piece is over stating the effect.
More details: https://rac.com.au/about-rac and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Automobile_Club_of_Weste...
It's great to see a historically car focused org trying to replace cars with bikes! It sounds like a pretty incredible organization — curious what the Western Australians here think.
There are plenty of other providers and with a little effort I can recall some of their names but when thinking about car insurance RAC springs to mind immediately.
Last time I lived in Australia I owned an electric bike and not a car and it was great. I would rent a car maybe once or twice a year for a long road trip but would otherwise just stick to my bike.
I think it’s a great initiative.
We have a similar climate to the US west coast with only a few weeks of rain a year, relatively flat landscape and way too many cars per person (due to public transport and distance).
It’s pretty common to drive very short distances to pickup something small. I’m sorely guilty of it.
One reason I avoid cycling is that I feel it’s somewhat risky. I lost a close friend in high school who got knocked down by a drunk driver. More bikes on the road raises awareness, so a net positive imho.
However, they do have some cool things. There's a charging station for electric cars at the RAC offices, and they launched a trial of an autonomous electric shuttle bus:
http://intellibus.rac.com.au/
Personally, I don't own a car, I'm 95% public transport (with the remainder being Uber, with the cost savings I tend to use Uber Black rather than UberX). Most places I need to go to are on the train line, a short bus ride away, or within walking distance.
Total (bike and ebike use): Before: 11% 1st week: 55% 5th week: 65% (peak) 10th week: 50% After: 41% (not everyone bought the ebike)
Car use went from 61% (before) to 46% (after) — bikes decreased walking also.
100% of participants said they were satisfied, with more than half saying they were extremely satisfied with the e-bike.
Did you find information of average length of trip, number per day, and such?
You really need secure bike parking at both ends of the journey given that these are typically $1000+ machines - locks are no obstacle for a determined bike thief!
A cheap push-bike, on the other hand, you can feel comfortable parking on almost any street - which is really what makes a bike so convenient in the first place.
Better security/anti-theft technology needed. Needs to be effective and convenient!
Theft is the reason I don't use my bike anymore, unless I don't stop.
A generic bike on the other hand .. less chances to be noticed (by definition).
You do have to make sure you're attaching your bike to something solid, though.
A friend of mine had welded a small basket, grinded parts of the frame and let them rust, engraved his name on an old bike for commuting, even with a thick motorcycle chain it got stolen.
Rates of bicycle theft vary widely between countries, cities, and sometimes within cities (poor area / rich area, centre / suburbs, residential area / university campus).
Having a good quality bike makes riding more enjoyable, safer, more comfortable, more efficient.
0. It's suited to the task (a Wal-Mart mountain bike is lousy for running around town) 1. Stuff degrades gracefully (cheap index shifting generally does not; friction shifters are a far better choice on a cheap bike) 2. You maintain it. 3. You take the time (and money) to find a comfortable saddle for it.
Crappy bikes become unfun when they're neglected. Unfortunately, they usually get neglected because they were poorly suited for the intended purpose anyway, or because people don't want to pay a bike shop to tune up a $150 bicycle (which was probably poorly assembled in the first place).
This is a case where learning to do the work yourself pays the dividend of both raising the competence of the user and resulting in a useful tool for years to come.
Most people would be much better served by an old 10-speed than a new crappy mountain bike. They're better suited to getting around town, immensely tolerant of neglect because there isn't anything that truly needs to be in top shape to run, and easy to put right.
And yes, I say this as somebody who has a nice road bike, a nice mountain bike, and a road bike that lives outside all year long, looks like hell and that I wouldn't hesitate to ride 15-25 km.
Colleagues of mine with e-bikes or other, more expensive, bikes had parts stolen much more frequently.
There's always the risk of vandalism but I guess most thefts will know what an item is worth on ebay, they won't bother about a bike they could only get £50 for.
That's the concern with e-bikes, their battery is probably already worth stealing.
I think ebikes are therefore less prone to theft than regular bikes.
Also, many/most places don't have a bad bike theft problem. Locks are no obstacles for determined house/motorbike/etc thieves either, but people still use those.
We have motorbikes. There are obviously huge downsides to an ebike relative to an motorbike. They're faster, for instance.
I think a big part of the story is that ebikes are just fun to ride, aside from practicalities like travel time. This is kind of a weird conclusion, for a tranport policy person to digets. It can't be quantified and charted. What are they supposed to do with it?
This makes me curious about other things. Would a super-light, 4 wheel vehicles also be fun? What would a transport system look like if fun was the major guiding principle?
so what you describe is great, but would require similar/same driving license as some weaker type of motorbikes, with plates, registration etc. are you willing to go through this?
I've found when I kick the limiter in on my controller box, I don't have anywhere near enough power to assist with getting up hills. The 25km/h limit probably wouldn't be so bad on its own, its the 250W limit that makes things very awkward.
Its just a bodge job, Chinese conversion kit on a cheap frame but it works well.
I dont really need one on my commute (20km each way) but I like to tinker and seems like a fun project.
I bought mine as a bit of a stopgap until I'm physically fit enough to manage the commute unassisted.
In Sweden there is a secondary class of bikes that can have motor support up to 45 km/h but those require an insurance that costs a lot of money. And they eat batteries, those has to get better.
Its enough to get me to and from work on one charge though.
I can get up to 30mph on my bike but I stay slower just out of concern for pedestrians. I always slow down to a crawl when passing people, especially those who are walking dogs just to be on the safe side.
Sadly there are those who insist on bombing down the footpath at full throttle who spoil it for the rest of us.
Longer distances, higher speed, more weight.... At some (arbitrary) point there's a classification change that puts you in motorbike category.
I think outer suburb commutes in large Australian cities will always push that category. As you say, you need more speed, range, suspension. These add weight, require more saftey measures.
To cover these use cases, we probably need a new light/electric motorbike category, with its own rules.
Being in Australia, I believe you have the legendary postie bikes.
I also have no idea why they insist on it being pedal assisted rather than throttle based. The regulation states that you have to be pedalling for it to engage the motor, so you can't just engage the electric motor on it's own.
Such a regulation really limits the possible kits and bicycles you can purchase, as the Australian market seems to be lagging behind the rest of the world and the options are fewer.
I'm guessing by "conventional bicycle" you don't mean a mountain bike. Try riding a mountain bike at 30+, it feels wrong. Your whole posture is too upright, it's not designed for speed. Not easy to reach 30 on a mountain bike without going downhill.
(in Europe you can get 45 km/h pedelecs too, but you may need traffic insurance and be banned from bike lanes)
25 km/h on a dual suspension mountain bike is fast enough. Have you ever ridden a mountain bike at this speed? It feels fast. Lots of wind, lots of speed, lots of focus needed, and if you fall off at that speed... OUCH.
Imagine you could increase that limit to 30 or 35 km/h. You are now travelling VERY fast for a mountain bike on a bike path. Too fast in my opinion. Those paths are often shared. Hitting or clipping someone at 30 km/h won't be pretty.
Besides, there's nothing stopping you pedalling faster than 25, the motor stops assisting, but you easily push past that if you pedal in top gear. The motors are efficient enough now that 250 watts will get you to 25 even for a mountain bike.
I'm sure that is relevant.