Motor forces are entirely insignificant over what wheels, fork and frame experience when you are hard braking (primarily, of course, through the front brake).
No, the bigger issue with front drive is that the front wheel has less weight over it (so significantly less traction) and that should it ever lose traction, you are more or less guaranteed to crash while the rear wheel slipping is perfectly recoverable. This is exacerbated since a human motor knows not to turn the power on going through a turn in the wet, but e-bike motors don't bring any such intelligence.
In The Netherlands which is the biking Mecca of the world, last year more than 400,000 e-bikes were sold. It helps that the cities hundreds of years ago were designed for horses and not for cars. Notably a lot of elderly use e-bikes which not only keeps them fit but notably increases the range that they travel.
I don’t use my ebike for small errands because it’s too easy to just rip expensive stuff off of it while locked up.
Also, the picture shows a rider with no helmet which is insane. I wear a motorcycle helmet and leathers. The speed limit for ebikes on roads in CA is 28, which is deadly with even a normal bike helmet.
Finally the article says that the new models are lighter because they’ve integrated battery in frames.
Totally false, the weight is not significantly lower and the in-frame battery means when your battery wears out in 3-10 years, you’ll have to pay the maker to replace it if it’s possible at all.
I highly recommend converting yourself using a bafang bbshd
You seem very defensive in your position of advocating people be less safe on their bikes. Quite odd. Anyway, good day. "There is good evidence that bicycle helmets are effective in reducing head and facial injury in the event of a crash [...]" [0]
The evidence in favor of wearing a helmet while in a car is just as strong, but nobody is up here advocating for that.
By the way, helmets on bicyclists tend to make car drivers behave like even bigger jackholes than usual. https://psyarxiv.com/nxw2k "... public health research might be best served by shifting focus to risk elimination rather than harm mitigation."
The argument could be just as strong, but since very few people wear helmets in cars (only Formula 1 etc.), I think it's unlikely "the evidence" is just as strong; however, by all means provide us a reference.
And that's why it's disingenuous to frame cycling safety as a binary that's contingent on whether or not a particular cyclist is wearing a helmet. The risk equation for you is vastly different from someone who hops on their cruiser bike to go 10 blocks on a protected bike trail to the grocery store.
Once you factor in all the variables, the helmet is only a small part of the equation, and probably not going to do you much good should you find yourself under the wheels of a semi-truck. Yet having that piece of styrofoam strapped to your head has given you the (possibly misplaced) confidence to go fast with semi-trucks.
That's classified as an electric motorbike in the EU, if it's a legal, registered vehicle. You need the appropriate driving license and insurance to drive one.
Alternatively, if it's a modified bicycle, it's simply illegal on public roads.
The helmet isn't going to protect you from semis, unfortunately. Here in NYC most cyclist deaths are caused by being run over by larger vehicles, which can easily be fatal even at slow speeds regardless of whether you're wearing a helmet or not. No helmet is going to support the weight of a truck.
Now I do wear a bike helmet when biking for other reasons, but I give trucks wide leeway.
I think ebikes are limited to 25km/h (15mph) across the EU. That's a speed a commuter might reach on a regular bike on flat terrain, the motor just helps making it effortless and terrain-independent. It's still advisable to wear a helmet since cars drive faster than that.
There are eBikes which can go up to 45km/h. For those wearing a helmet is mandatory. They also have number plates and you have to have a dedicated insurance.
Not exactly. Electric assist should stop above 25km/h for the ebike to still be considered a bicycle (and be allowed on bike lanes, etc.); but it's not hard to go above that speed when going downhill for example, and not against the law (provided you still respect the speed limit for the road you're on).
I don't think there are specific speed limits for bike lanes, or bikes, anywhere in the EU (but of course I could be wrong).
I commute to work with my regular, non-e bicycle, sharing the road with cars. I wouldn't dream of not wearing a helmet, even at "just" 25 km/h, though for most of my commute I keep speeds above that (up to 50km/h).
My 18 miles commute is 2 miles of sleepy suburban traffic and 16 miles on the SF Bay Trail (IOW: flat dirt track with no cars allowed.) Even if it were all dirt track, I'd still be wearing my helmet.
Yes and there’s an analogy here between car commuters and car racers. We don’t expect “normal” car drivers to wear helmets. But professional racers absolutely wear helmets. Even in the case of commuters, a helmet could save your life in an accident. For any drivers who thinks bike commuters need helmets, I would encourage you to also get car helmets for you and your loved ones: https://www.amazon.com/RaceQuip-253116-X-Large-Helmet-SA-201...
This is a terrible argument it is not a one to one comparison.
If you are shunted in the rear on the way to work in your car you might have a inconvenient morning and an insurance claim. If the same thing happens on your bike you could quite literally die from a head injury.
I skated for a long time and didn't wear a helmet because of comfort/looks. I've become a bit more wise since and won't share the road with cars without my helmet when I'm cycling
Ironically these are the same dangers bike poses to pedestrians
And with the boom of food delivery,mostly done by bike, the situation got a lot worse
Just two hours ago a guy working for glovo merged on the sidewalk while I was trying to cross on the zebra walks and almost hit me.
He was using one hand, wasn't looking, with the other hand was speaking at the phone and didn't stop at the red light
No need to specify they are not allowed on sidewalks, but who's gonna fine them?
It happens constantly, but bikers usually think that cars are to blame, when cars usually let me cross when the light is green, they usually stop at the red light and they usually don't ride on the sidewalk
Give people bikes that can go at 30km/h and you have the recipe for a disaster
We already have regular and e-mopeds but at least they are heavy regulated and need a mandatory insurance (at least in Italy)
I regularly call out bikes who don’t give the right of way to pedestrians in the crosswalk.
That said, unless someone is already frail being hit by a bike is nothing like being hit by a car. I’ve had two red-light running bicyclists crash in to me (once while biking, once while skateboarding). I’ve also been in three separate cars that got rear-ended (none of those times was I driving). The level of pain is an order of magnitude different.
E-bikes can go at very high speeds (30km/h is more than enough to be deadly) and can do it effortlessly, which means the even bikers that aren't expert can go at such high speeds, increasing the risk of hurting someone else or themselves.
Add to that the fact that a car can break or avoid obstacles in a much more efficient way than a bike could ever do (think about heavy breaking with a bike at 25 km/h under heavy rain on the pavet and then think about it on a car).
I'm not a supporter of cars, I've been car free for a few years now, but I don't think bikes are less dangerous for pedestrians.
There are simply less of them around.
> The level of pain is an order of magnitude different
The maximum level of pain I suffered was because of my bad teeth
I was in a very bad car accident (a tire detached from my car while driving on the highway and I lost control), the pain was a joke compared to that.
Pain is not a strong indicator of dangerous physical damage.
For example internal bleeding is usually painless.
And yet how many people die from being hit by bikes? It's barely even an issue. Even in European cities where you can step on the wrong side of a sidewalk and instantly get smashed into. It's an imaginary problem.
>Add to that the fact that a car can break or avoid obstacles in a much more efficient way than a bike could ever do
That's obviously false. Just consider the stuff that BMX bikes can do in terms of maneuvering. Or even normal bikes. Try driving on a car through a busy pedestrian street. On a bike it's a piece of cake, and you won't have to stop even once.
Is it because of the road conditions, the presence of cars or other vehicles?
Or is it because cyclists underestimate the risks?
According to the same study, motorcyclists only account for 2.7% of the hospitalizations.
They share the road with cars as well, they go faster than bikes on the same roads.
What could be different?
Could it be that the safety measures engineered in motorbikes and the safety measures motorbikers take to protect themselves are actually useful to reduce physical damages?
Even Netherlands has a big problem with bikers dying more than ever because of underestimating risks.
If you get “shunted” from behind by an SUV, 3cm of expanded polystyrene foam is going to make FA difference to the outcome.
Bike helmets are designed for low speed crashes NOT involving vehicles.
Now I still wear one myself but I don’t fool myself that doing so brings me any protection from someone driving an SUV who thinks they’ll be late getting to a 24 supermarket if don’t just squeeze by me.
It’s like putting an oven glove on an egg and hitting it with a hammer.
Just incase anyone wonders why I wear a helmet when I think they’re as useless as “anti-volcano spray”, it’s because they make my head a more aerodynamic shape.
A quick look a Strava’s stats will show you that even weak club cyclists like me, living somewhere pretty flattish, can already cruise about at over 20mph pretty easily.
Pedal assist ebikes just expand that ability to a wider number of people.
Just look at the number of people who regularly crash in amateur crit races.
We generally survive non-vehicle related crashes at these speeds pretty well and people on ebikes will too.
If you stop a moment and think carefully, you'll realize that normal car drivers should wear helmets, and passengers too.
It's just that piloting multi-ton metal vehicles at bone-shattering velocities has been normalized. It's always been insane and deadly, but there was an actual concerted effort to normalize it and that worked. I'm not even joking. "Speed demons" were replaced by "Jay walkers" and people have been getting maimed and killed ever since.
Helmets in cars aren't without issue, though. They restrict your vision and situational awareness via hearing. I was a rally driver for about 10 years, and the MSA (UK Motorsport body) banned drivers on road sections from wearing helmets - both because it was a PR nightmare, but also because of the issues with vision (in full face helmets) and hearing (although I appreciate many people have loud music on in cars, or wear headphones, etc).
Also, you really -want- to have a helmet on in a race car - you'll typically have an unpadded roll cage right by your head, and the FIA-approved padding for roll cages is designed to work well with helmets, not with heads. I used to dread long road sections on rallies as I knew that an accident would be a real mess if there was any contact with the cage. There's more room in a road car, and there's padding / airbags etc to cushion you from impact on hard structures.
Cultural differences in traffic management. In the US, bicycle infrastructure is sparse outside of dense urban cores (and even then, it can be spotty). That leaves many cyclists sharing roads with higher speed auto traffic.
Also, the style of bicycle is often different. Hybrid and town bikes are far less common the US than Europe. I suspect that an easy-step over, big tire, upright town bicycle is easier (and this safer) to use.
By that logic, shouldn't all cyclists wear a DOT rated motorcycle helmet? I'm pretty sure those flimsy bicycle helmets most people wear aren't rated for vehicular strikes.
Probably? And leathers too. But, pedaling in August heat in a closed helmet and heavy armored suit isn't easy.
Mostly, I'm suggesting better bicycle infrastructure is one reason people may be less likely to wear helmets in Europe vs the US. And not making any claims about how safe a helmet in the US actually is or is not.
You don’t need cars in order for a helmet to be important.
An acquaintance of mine was killed running into a slightly raised piece of ground that he didn’t see... wasn’t wearing a helmet and was thrown over his handlebars. Doctors say he would have walked away if he had been wearing a helmet.
Absolutely. But, there's a risk analysis - if there's good bike infrastructure, and I'm riding townie bike (slow and can put feet down vs a road racing bike), the risk is much lower.
There's also evidence that requiring helmets reduces cycling among the general population. Partially because it's an extra thing to buy/maintain, but it also creates more work for commuters - they have to redo their hair at the office.
Residents of Amsterdam don't seem to wear helmets at all, except for high-speed training rides/racing. And they seem to do ok like that.
1)Most cities suck at biking infrastructure, including Europe if you exclude the poster childs like Amsterdam or Copenhagen.
2)It's not wearing a helmet that reduces cycling throughout the population it's the lack of infrastructure. Helmet necessity is a direct effect of that not the cause.
3)You can't make helmets a requirement, it's up to you if you can live(pun not intended) with the consequences of an accident without a helmet or not.
Bummer, but at the same time it's hard to argue with a measure designed to save lives. If seatbelts wouldn't have been compulsory for decades I think people would have a hard time accepting them as mandatory.
The article I read (this was a few years ago) wondered if the reduction in cycling (due to helmet laws created on safety grounds) actually ended up with the opposite effect. Fewer people outside cycling, more people in cars creating smog and getting fat. They didn't provide any data, just posed the question. I can certainly envision circumstances where that would be true, but you'd have to already have a very safe cycling culture (Amsterdam), I'd think.
Helmets are a lot less convenient than seatbelts. They have to be stored somewhere, locked to your bike hopefully, and people will still screw with them just because they can. Then you have to put it on your head and somehow get it to be comfortable and not mess up your hair before you arrive at work. None of this is really bad for American biking culture: biking is a serious affair with its own work out clothes with a probable shower if they are going to work anyways. It isn't like Amsterdam where you just kick off in your suit and arrive at work.
I don't really care for government safety rules like these in general. And I totally get that biking is relatively safe in places were it's deeply ingrained to the culture like Amsterdam. I still cringe at least a little bit though with pics like this. (from Amsterdam)
> it's hard to argue with a measure designed to save lives.
No, it's easy to argue because cars inarguably cause way more deaths than bikes. So when people switch to cars from bikes, it's indirectly killing more people. Any measure that prevents bike use leads to more deaths.
Helmets are for any activity that has an impact risk to your head which includes cycling not just sports.
I live in Austria where few cyclists wear helmets yet my girlfriend who works in the local hospital sees patients coming in with serious head injuries on a daily basis from biking accidents that could have easily been prevented by wearing a helmet. Since then we both wear our helmets religiously.
You don't even have to get hit by a car. An unfortunate collision with a texting pedestrian, some dog on a leash jumping in front of you or another cyclist could be enough to smack your melon on the asphalt.
Just because you hear Europeans aren't wearing helmets doesn't mean it's the model to follow. I see wearing a helmet the same as wearing a seatbelt.
Sure I never needed it since I never had an accident and it feels slightly uncomfortable but I know it could save my life.
It's up to you how much you value your head.
I highly doubt ebikes have a 50% share in Belgium. Do you have any references on that claim? Last year I visited Belgium's 4 major cities and almost every cyclist I saw was on some old half broken bicycle.
Does anyone have head injury statistics? I know falls are a major cause of preventable death in the US, but I don’t even know how those break down between someone on a bike vs an old person falling over.
It's not just about death, it's also about brain damage. A broken bone is NBD compared to a TBI with often permanent damage.
You can lock helmets with bikes if you want. I used to lock my helmet with my u-lock on my bike, so if they cut off the helmet, then it isn't a very useful helmet. I now bring it with me in my bag mostly for hygenic reasons although.
Personally I would avoid locking a helmet up like that.
Expanded foam helmets are fragile by design. They are design to be disposable with even small knocks. So even accidentally banging them against your frame, dlock or solid post is a bad idea even if you can’t visibly see any damage.
You’re recommended to replace them at regular intervals also due to sweat damage.
That isn't much of a solution in practice. No helmet manufacturer puts best after dates, other than in fine print nobody reads and practically nobody replaces helmets unless they see visible damage.
Then again 3cm of expanded polystyrene foam vs a metal box with a engine in it... probably like a surfer forgetting to replace their “anti-shark bite” medallion anyway.
I hate that HN is a place where the ignorant simply flaunt their ignorance instead of trying to inform themselves.
"According to the Velofollies survey as well as other sources last year’s [2018] e-bike sales stood at slightly over a quarter million units; some 251,500 to be more precise. This accounts for a big 14.3 percent growth compared to the total of the year before. It makes electric bicycles by far the biggest category of the Belgian market with a market share that stands at close to 50 percent."
To add context to your downvotes, it is clear that the author you cite used "market share" in an unusual way (possibly due to a language barrier), since there are certainly more than ~503,000 bicycles in the whole country of Belgium.
What would help your case (with regards to downvotes, and for your words to have greater impact) is to convey additional information instead of just repeating the same thing. For example, you could state that "Market share reflects sales of an item over a fiscal period -- which is different from installed base, which reflects the percentage of units that are in current usage". You can even include a pointer to a reference, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Installed_Base.
This way, even if you are technically correct, you can better convey knowledge when it appears that communication isn't occurring.
Yeah but it's 2020 and I decided that just because people are displaying their own ignorance on the Internet doesn't impute upon me the duty to adjust their attitudes. If two fuckwits on HN want to hang around and tell me that I am using the term "market share" in a wrong or unusual way, when they themselves are the ones who obviously don't know what it means, then let them do it. Eventually the accumulated mass of stupidity recorded on this site will sink it.
Does this logic extend to showering, pedestrians, and automobile passengers and drivers? All suffer as many or more head injuries per year than cyclists.
They may have more head injuries than cyclists(citation?) but unlike cyclists you're not at risk of being run over by a car after a fall in your shower and also you're probably not showering at 25km/h when you fall so the potential damage is much lower.
A head injury that results from speed or post-strike collisions is still recorded as a "cyclist head injury" so I don't think your points change the numbers.
Please note, I'm not trying to argue against helmets. The point is that arguments over helmets deflect the conversation away from the people sailing around recklessly in two ton metal boxes. Every time there’s a collision involving a cyclist, the question is "was he wearing a helmet?", not, "was the driver paying attention?"
The safest places to bicycle are in the nations where there's the lowest rates of cyclists wearing helmets. This is a car problem, not a bicycle problem.
I think the biggest reason people don't see a bicycle helmet as necessary is from personal experience. I grew up on the 70's, long before kids helmets were in vogue. And I had several bicycle accidents.
Once I hit a curb, went over the handlebars, and skinned up my hands/knees and my wrists hurt pretty bad for a week or so after. Another time I wiped out at the bottom of a hill, tore a huge gash in the side of my knee. Then there was the time I chipped a tooth on a curb when trying to ride no-handed.
In all the falls I experienced, none of them involved a head injury that a helmet would have prevented (the chipped tooth incident could have been prevented by wearing a mouth guard, or by not being stupid). So based on that, it feels like helmets are useless.
Of course, in reality there is a huge difference between a kid riding a bicycle at single-digit MPH on neighborhood streets and back-woods trails, vs. going 15 - 20 MPH on roads or paved trails. At those speeds, it would probably be impossible for me to break my fall using just hands and feet, not to mention the possibility of getting distracted hand running into a street sign or tree branch. Logically I'm aware of all this, but still I have trouble with maintaining proper helmet discipline.
Austrians use bicycles a lot more rigorously, but there is still a resistance to 'being told to wear a helmet' .. alas, it only takes one fall to demonstrate convincing evidence for why one should always, always, always wear a helmet.
As a dutchman who spend some time working and commuting in the SF bay area: Commuting on a bike without a bright yellow helmet and a combination of flashing lights that rival an emergency vehicle is basically suicidal behavior.
Em3ev and Luna are the name brands if you’re buying it with a battery (nice since it will be wired up for you).
Chargers are a pain since you want an 80-20 charge cycle.
The name brands have options for this and you know what battery cells you’re getting.
I used the meanwell hlg 54a to make my own chargers. They are the best value and ul listed if you don’t mind doing your own connections and have a voltage meter
I built myself an ebike with a Bafang BBS02 18 months ago, and use it constantly. The main problems are:
- No safe parking anywhere. So far so good but it's only a matter of time before my bike gets stolen.
- Range. Much too short (less than 40km in my experience).
Yet, it's fantastic. It changed my life. It almost totally replaced my motorbike for every trip except the longest ones (I live in Paris so most trips are short).
Don't know of any but if you're just looking for instructions to make one, Youtube has plenty of videos and it's not very hard. I started from a Decathlon VTT 540 and it was pretty straightforward. (Or you can use a 520 instead: no hydraulic brakes, which makes it much easier to replace brake levers.)
Yeah I've sniped these videos for a while but I'm highly demotivated on my own and don't have much space to tinker with bikes. Alas, thanks anyway, I hope to run into you (collisionless-ly) one day. The sight of ebikes (and even lime scooters on river decks) pleases me a lot.
I also have a BBS02 about 1.5 years old. I get about 15 miles range which is plenty for me, I've only ever run out once and that's because I was still trying to figure out its max range.
I will say that I don't especially recommend it unless you want to pedal a lot (or live in a very hilly area). If you're lazy like me I'd recommend a hub motor - having to change gears constantly and every time I come to a stop gets really old really fast.
Just purchased a cargo bike, and with full load (1 adult, 2 16kg kids and lots of 'cargo') we get 80km autonomy in 'normal' (no effort, light speed) mode. Even the 'high' mode (ridiculous) we get 50km range.
I converted a nice traditional steel frame bike to with an e-bike kit. I would not really recommend that route - especially not if you’re hauling around a kid or gear like me. I was blowing through brake pads every 3-6 months and for most people it’s probably best to buy a nice e-bike that’s well built and tailored to the task.
That’s a question of riding habits not the conversion. Treat em like a bike with assist up hills and the breaks last just as long as a normal bike. Treat it like a moped with lots of hard braking and you want quality disk brakes as part of your conversion.
Saying that I stick at the low end. 50W - 150W is still very noticeable assistance, but still mostly a bike. 500+W is really a very different category.
Having witnessed ebike conversions by a couple folks that I would characterize as skilled, I would recommend buying something premade. Unless you are both a skilled bike mechanic and into electronics, it can be a huge rathole. It won’t be less than getting either a used ebike or a radpower bike new.
Been seeing a guy in the neighborhood with an old schwinn mated to a chainsaw motor. Looks like a death trap putting that rotted frame under so much load.
In California, a helmet is required for an ebike that can go 28 mph (class 3 e-bike). For the 20 mph e-bikes (class 1 and class 2) no helmet is required for adults.
I'd really like to see more support for class 2 bikes on bike paths around the bay area. Class 2, which does not require pedaling, gets around the "I'm too sweaty when I get to work" issue. My dream: a bike highway to the silicon valley from outlying areas.
Still pretty slow for full leathers which would be heavy, hot, sweaty, horrible to pedal in and a pain changing in and out of.
A full face mounting bike helmet might be a lot lighter and offer very good protection for the speeds you are travelling as designed for fast downhill riding. The thing with motorcycle helmets is they are heavy and not designed for high intensity cardio so hard to breath in doing anything slightly intensive. Motorcross style helmets have a larger chin and visor area to allow for better air flow for breathing plus vision as motorcross can be quite physical.
Also instead of full leathers if you are interested in safety the motorcycle Kevlar jeans and tops should be a little more comfortable cycling although I’d still find them not great for any physical work. Another option would be one of the motorcycle pressure suits for your torso, I think they do them for mounting biking to and offer a bit of airflow with the padding. A bit more convenient than full leathers, abrasion wouldn’t be the main issue at your speeds, it’d be impact force.
When you're hit by a motorist and slide to a stop on asphalt, there's really no such thing as overkill when it comes to road rash protection. Speaking from personal experience.
I’ve had road rash from wearing regular denim jeans, scrubbed it with a stiff brush to clean which is the only way so know how it feels.
Kelvar should be sufficient for abrasion at 28km/h, it’s used in motorcycle gear where you go much faster. Also gear with 1000d ballistic nylon in the abrasion zones, same deal used for motorcycle clothing.
I’ve had a few offs 60-80+ kmph wearing textile gear on unsealed roads, dirt tracks etc and textiles have stood up well, just picked myself up and the bike and jumped back on.
Cycling on the road impact will be a far bigger issue than abrasion.
I can’t imagine cycling in leather, they are designed to be tight fitting, cut for sitting in a fairly static position, hot and sweaty. Leathers are not comfortable in hot weather on a motorcycle, I just can’t imagine having to pedal wearing them or doing anything physical.
That's nice as a sport but we are mostly talking about commuting here. The assist an e-bike gives you is nice if you don't want to sweat and have to go uphill.
This is the type of attitude that is why people get so annoyed by bikers. It's not a huge portion of the population that is fit enough to ride ~85km in a day. Yet whenever people discuss commuting, there's a chorus of bikers pipe in how biking is so easy and everyone else is a dummy for not doing it, in every city I've lived in. E-bikes and E-scooters can vastly open up the non-car transportation market, don't be smug.
Seems pie in the sky to get adoption of e-bikes in places like my home state of Texas. Our city has e-bikes for rent all along the city biking system, very cheap too!
These bikes are available for rent nearly all of the time, except for when we close down a few streets for the spring fair. So, adoption isn't going to happen very fast in places where there is no appetite. We have cheap gas here and A/C in our cars.
You're right that A/C and heat is a big factor; forget being able to shower there, no one likes exercising in one hundred ten-degree heat. Distance is a problem too, though: in cities lots of people commute 40+ miles to work each way, which isn't really feasible by bike. Thinking about when I got started working as hourly, I would never have spent two or three times the time because that would have a serious opportunity cost, so probably never an option for hourly workers.
A while ago, I was seriously considering buying a bike (A regular one, 110 CC). I didn't because there's no way in hell my partner will let me ride it for the main purpose that I wanted to buy it for, take our 6 yo to school (as I wanted to buy it mainly for that, as riding a bike is much faster in the city where I live, Buenos Aires).
I just went to the site where I do all my purchases, and that same bike is at the same price tag as an ebike of medium quality.
I reckon this country is a little particular when it comes to economics, but buying an ebike is far from cheap around here. Until that changes, the bulk of people will use just regular means of transport in this country.
Besides that, I do think that electric vehicles are the best way to move around for distances in the low miles.
How about cargo bikes, also sometimes called Christiania bikes: https://www.christianiabikes.com/uk/category/models/ ? I've seen people transport kids in them, their lower center of gravity make it safer for the kids.
I don't think the economics are much different in the US either. I have been eyeing some classic motorcycles for a while ('70s hondas, ~350cc) and they are less than half the price of the higher end cargo e-bikes. Like electric cars, electric bikes are a luxury purchase and are only viable for the wealthy in wealthy cities currently.
You need a special license for mopeds in many jurisdictions, they weigh 100+ pounds, double what an e-bike weighs, and because of the fuel system you can't really just carry it up the stairs and leave it in your kitchen at night.
I've ridden 5,000 miles on my ebike in two years. The e assist flattens hills and shrinks the city. I can use my bike to get anywhere in Seattle in reasonable time. I regularly beat the bus and I've tied with ride shares more than once.
I think e-bikes will be very successful, but you have to get the product into the people's hands. It's hard to know what an e-bike is like until you try it. They are so fun, and getting fresh air will almost certainly make you more happy.
But trying to convince people of that without putting them on an e-bike is kind of hard.
Agreed, especially given the 2-4K you have to plonk down on some of these things. They sound great, but I haven't yet used them. The money thing is a barrier, and I'm a one-car family looking for options.
For that kind of money, you're buying a pretty solid scooter or a cheap car. Nevermind if you want a cargo bike or Bakfiets. Having the infrastructure / city planning to make this worthwhile is definitely an important second part. I'm not going to park a $4K bike just anywhere.
I ride a motorcycle to work almost everyday (today's 47 degree ride was a bit brisk) and i have to say, drivers don't look out for bikes, and this is a major city (San Antonio).
My big issues with motorized bicycles are lanes to ride and rules of the road. I see people riding them on sidewalks, in streets, and in bike lanes. It is almost like people on motorcycles who ride in the break down lane or lane split (both of which are illegal in Texas).
We already had/have a HUGE problem with the escooters, people getting run down by kids on the sidewalks and riding them in traffic downtown.
I am for this 100%, but please put down infrastructure and some sort of rules of the road and enforce it.
I'm in San Antonio as well and have switched to Currus NF [1] high speed electric scooter. For areas of San Antonio I believe it's totally feasible now and for others due to safety / lack of roads with viable route and 35 mph or lower speed limits it is not. I spend almost all of my time inside the 10 mile diameter area bounded by 410 on the north, 10 on the south, the AT&T Center on the east and Our Lady of the Lake on the west.
While the rented scooters downtown have been a mess during the roll out they have visibly reduced downtown auto traffic (much of which my hypothesis is was Lyft / Uber / Taxis).
There are some simple rules pedestrians can follow that make commuting easier for everyone. Move at a steady pace. Don't stop or change lanes without doing a shoulder check. Look both ways before crossing the flow of traffic.
This not only makes it easier to share the sidewalk with vehicles, it also improves the flow when there are a lot of foot commuters with different walking speeds.
I live in a city where pedestrians frequently share the sidewalk with both bicycles and electric mopeds. It works because people pay attention to what's going on around them and generally work together to try keep the traffic flowing smoothly.
That sort of rule of thumb works fine with an abled bodied sober and alert adult, but throw in someone with a disability, an elderly person, a toddler, and suddenly it makes far more sense to have the bike/moped on the road and just offer the gutter at the very least for a bike lane. A road bike can kill a toddler.
Usually the way it works here is if a rider sees a kid or older person then they will slow down to walking pace and only pass when it's safe. Pedestrians still have right of way, after all.
I am not against dedicated roads for bikes (although depending on the city's density, they can just end up as a second sidewalk), but I also think it shouldn't be treated as a prerequisite for developing a bike culture.
Again, the honor rule isn't a great rule for people. Most people are reasonable but we regulate for those that aren't. In my experience by shared bike/walking baths, if I see a cyclist in spandex riding a carbon fiber bike at 25mph, I barrel out of the way because they won't slow down, they will hit me, then they will blame me for being in the way of the bike.
For many years I rode and was in favor of "bike culture". Now that I finally live in such a place, though, it's quite clear that this experiment is a failure. Bicyclists ride as they like, without respect to laws or even likely tragedies, and there is no countervailing force to reign them in. I cannot walk a block without observing a bicyclist breaking a law or risking someone's life (often their own).
If bicyclists want this mode of transportation to be taken seriously, they need to start self-policing in a major way. So far I'm seeing not even a hint of that.
The answer should be protected bike lanes and separated bike paths/trails. But, US cities generally have very few of those, preferring to skimp by just using strips of paint.
Hence the situation you end up with here: some go into the meager bike lanes, some feel more comfortable taking the lane, and some feel safer on protected walk lanes, aka sidewalks.
>We already had/have a HUGE problem with the escooters, people getting run down by kids on the sidewalks and riding them in traffic downtown.
How much of a huge problem is that that you have seen personally? I personally have found that everyone loves to complain about them, but I never find much evidence of people being run down by them (in what I've seen)
I have personally almost hit people riding in the middle of he road on multiple occasions (mostly near the convention center area). On the weekends i will drive around the downtown area wasting time and gas to now avoid that situation.
My wife drives for lyft and spends a considerable amount of time downtown and has almost had accidents with people riding escooters in the street, to the point we engaged our insurance agent and asked about liability (we were assured if hit in the middle of the road and not in a bike lane, crossing lane or sidewalk we would bee free of liability and she now has 3 cameras in her vehicle).
An last year at PAX south in downtown SA I was walking on the sidewalk and hearing people yelling to move because they were having all sorts of fun chasing each other and almost running people down.
So I am not complaining to complain. I assume you live in San Antonio and are downtown quite a bit? People leave them everywhere, they fall over in the streets, you cannot say you don't see this.
It's not exactly easy to just "put down" infrastructure. In fact that is the single hardest piece of this puzzle. Technology can't defeat the will of the people, which is still firmly behind dedicating as much space as possible to driving and parking cars [in Texas and most of the US].
I think this would be amazing for some cities. I've used a electric motorcycle/scooter to commute around San Francisco for 3 years now, and it made me fall in love with the city again. I've used Jump e-bikes to get around as well instead of Uber/Lyfts when I can. (I'd use them more, but their service area stop a mile from my house)
Sadly I think SF is a good special case where it works well most of the year:
1. City is pretty compact. It's not exactly 7mix7mi, but not far off either.
2. Weather is pretty good most of the year. (no ice/snow/freezing rain, etc) Yes you can cycle in fog. ;)
3. Speed limit is 20mph in residential, and 30mph on busier roads, but congestion generally makes the impossible. Bike lanes are normally free.
4. Bike lanes/paths/routes are expanding throughout the city. Including nicely protected routes.
5. Parking and Gas are expensive here. I was just in Texas and filled up a car for < $20. I can't remember when I did that last.
Sure it's a dream, and I wish the article would come true here. Imagine how cool it would be to have tons of bikes on the road and so many less cars/ICE zooming around? Ok, maybe I'm just not a car person. ;)
There are hiccups though:
1. Carrying groceries/etc. You can't get a shopping cart full and take it home.
2. Kids...getting them to school. Cargo bikes here are an option, but they need to be a certain age and I do worry about safety. :/
3. It does rain...and ridding in the rain sucks. Most parts of the US get it so much worse though, it feels hard to complain.
4. Commuting via bike to work does take time/effort. Carrying a change of clothes, showering, etc, etc.
I largely agree with your points as an ebike commuter on the west side of LA which has similar properties (surprisingly compact, protected bike lanes, good weather, very expensive gas).
I also use it regularly to carry groceries via saddle bags and find it to be much more convenient than fighting the parking lot at my local trader joes. Also, it is generally flat here so I don't find the need to shower and change clothes but then again, I bike to work in jeans and a t-shirt so maybe it would be different in a suit?
Cities need to remove car lanes and add protected bike lanes to really increase adoption. Most parents would not let their kids ride on the road with cars. The car always wins and cars are very dangerous. As far as the schools--they used to be smaller and more local. Now schools always seem to be built on the periphery of a town, take up a massive amount of space and are pretty much designed only for cars/busses. Cars cause cities to be built in ways that are only car-friendly. Hopefully e-bikes provide a revolution in that regard to make other forms of transit equally viable.
I think your 1 & 2 aren't worries really: most cities are small, and experience shows that weather isn't really an object (central/northern europe has the bicycling capitals).
People are much less finicky about outdoors activities in non-optimal weather in places that don't have californian weather :)
We don't necessarily need an one-size-fits-all solution to fix traffic emissions, it's fine if people in different cities end up doing different things.
I've been commuting using a class-1 (limited to 20 mph) e-bike around Santa Barbara, CA for the last year and it is a dream. Far better experience than I expected. It won't work in all cities but if you have reasonable bike lanes switching over from a car can have many benefits.
1. Cost. Sure it's a high initial outlay (3k) but I'm not paying for insurance, gas, parking, and auto loan payments.
2. Faster. I can hop on my bike, ride to my building at 20mph, and park in my office. No dealing with paid parking in the city and walking from the lot.
3. Better for my physical and mental health. The daily exercise, fresh air, and feeling of connection to the bustle of the streets makes me happier.
If you have a short commute and have a safe route to work or errands I highly recommend giving it a try. Being able to pick up speed and keep up with traffic helps make it much safer and easier than a non-assist bike.
I have been using a used RadPower [1] bike for the last 1.5 years in Seattle. I now drive the car less than < 50 miles per month. I use the ebike and some bus, but mostly bike. Depending on the urgency and my want for exercise, I can adjust the level of effort, something that cannot be done in the car. The bike is faster and actually enjoyable. The batteries should be standardized so that refurbishment and recycling can be done en masse.
You are right about that. I'm hoping eventually this will become popular enough that cities will open more dedicated bike paths separate from traffic. I've even heard rumors of our city closing and dedicating the main street downtown for bikes and pedestrians.
I would also add that Santa Barbara generally has some of the most delicious air i've experienced in a place that still has restaurants, stores, jobs, etc. It surely gets worse with proximity-to and volume-of car traffic but overall the air quality here vs. other places i've lived is noteworthy[0]. (0: except when there's fires.)
San Francisco recently voted to shut down the main downtown road (Market St.) to private cars. I think taxis and buses will still be allowed, but otherwise it'll only be bikes!
In some sense this is true—I like to believe the benefits of exercise outweigh the increased exposure to air pollution. However, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that bicyclists are often breathing deeply next to traffic that can, in some cases, be putting out a lot of bad stuff.
I knew some researchers who were specifically looking at the question of bicyclist exposure to air pollution by pedaling around town with nephalometers (IIRC). I don’t remember what their conclusions were, if any. I should look that up.
Here's a video about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySzmo_sScQk The message was that yes, city cyclists are inhaling polluted air. But the benefits from the exercise cycling gives you far outweighs the negatives.
Also, driving in a car doesn't protect you from air pollution. Cars suck in polluted air from the car ahead and concentrate it around the driver and passengers. You're actually less exposed to pollution cycling the same route.
But most of the time, you're not commuting with cars, because you can take ways through woods or river beds, etc. that are open to bikes but closed to cars.
I’ve been doing a commute from Cambridge ma to Boston with an ebike this year. I agree it’s big plus is being able to pick up speed rapidly in traffic.
The being able to easily keep up with traffic is what I miss when I switch to my regular bike, which I had been comuting with for years.
Also I ride it more than my traditional bike because it is easier. (I rode to work today) Parking is easier too though I’m still a little nervous leaving it on the street (I have bike cages at home/work)
I’ll second your recommendation of giving it a try.
I commute with a regular bike and proper clothing is your friend. It's also not rocket science. You get pretty warm through the movement so often it's okay to just wear something that stops the wind.
I usually wear regular clothing (like jeans and hoodie) and add to it when necessary (long johns in the winter, maybe a power-stretch jacket).
My experience is that it's most important to keep your ears, hands, and torso warm, which I achieve with a windbreaker vest or jacket depending on how cold it is. Even if I'm a bit chilly when I leave, I'm certain to be warm when I arrive at my destination -- sometimes a bit too warm, but not nearly as sweaty as I would be if I were riding a regular bike instead of an e-bike.
For me my fingers and face are the part that suffers most. Beause you are working out you do warm up.
Its only about 35-40 minutes for me so I can be a little lighter on the clothing. A balaclava for my face (Its a a ski mask with an big circular opening for my nose and eyes). Thats usually enough, but I have a thin hat that fits under the helmet. my work shirts are golf shirts and wick sweat away, but wool or polypro long underwear is helpful when its really really cold. You don't want to get wet from sweat, because it will suck the heat out of you. I usually just use normal pants. I have a flease jacket and a windproof shell on top.
I use wool glove liners and good windproof gloves. My hands can still get cold. Especially when its windy along the river. I'm experimenting with usb li-on glove warmers, which seem to help on the two times I've used them. They're kind bulky in my gloves and I don't love that.
(I've seen people with fixed hand warmers on there bikes but I haven't gone that far). Ski googles too (I wear glasses so that helps the wind in my eye problem).
Good socks too. I lower my seat in the winter to make it easier to touch ground if I hit ice.
We recently got a class 1 electric cargo bike, and it's also been a dream. With it, we can transport one adult, both kids, and a couple weeks' worth of groceries. Throw in a second (in this case non-e) bike, and that's an additional adult and a decent amount of extra cargo.
If nothing else, it's easily worth the experience of getting the kids to and from school. It takes less time and it's enjoyable instead of aggravating. Win-win.
I'm finding that, in my city, we tend to move faster than traffic if there's any traffic at all. Cars might go faster when they're not stopped, but they're spending most their time queued up at traffic lights and stop signs. Bikes get to go to ride right past those lines.
I remember when Dean Kaman introduced ginger/Segway as a transformational revolution in personal transportation...
If only he’d thought of electrifying available people-powered systems and miniaturizing as well adding capacity rather than re-inventing things. Of course hindsight... but what if he’d seen things differently.
All the kids these days seem to want a hoverboard. So the Segway is still a success IMO. Albeit limited to toy usage (for now), but a lot of inventions start out as a toy.
yes, the segway's innovation was essentially a consequence of moore's law: consumer-oriented computers and sensors were small enough, fast enough, robust enough, and power-efficient enough to calculate dynamic stability for locomotion in real-time (my field of study in grad school).
it was awe-inspiring and admirable from an engineering standpoint, but painfully misapplied and dorky from a societal one.
kamen could have used this technological advance on any number of (existing) personal transport machines, but he chose to invent his own, as inventors are wont to do.
I switched to an electric moped for daily commuting around Vienna, and it is a dream. I will never go back to internal combustion engine-based transportation.
Its just a much nicer platform, all-electric. I see it getting much, much wider adoption ..
I am all for E-Bikes, they put the relatively unused bike lanes to good use from what I see: Awesome stuff.
I do suggest some bike handling skills and helmet for anyone who tries though: You're still on a bike fully exposed to the world. Only now you're doing 25mph down a trail beset by jaywalking peds and lane jumping cars.
Do some high speed stops / slick road training - learn how to handle bad situations. Ride safe and wave at us on manpowered models :)
I’ve started using Uber’s Jump bikes in London to avoid changing tubes (sometimes this is possible) and the experience is revelatory. Cycling on the road by e-bike is quieter, easier and more effortless compared to changing tubes at a busy junction. For my journey the time is also identical. The benefits of course include getting fresher air and exercise (e-bikes still require your own energy)
Also interesting alternatives that start to pop up are electric personal transportation vehicles like EUC (electric unicycle), e-scooters and similar.
I'm personally using EUC to work in food delivery and I commute to and from area of work. I can make 130km a day with peak speed of 25mph. This is my between-programming-jobs endeavour. I also commuted 10miles one way to my office and it allowed me to skip traffic jams.
I truly believe e-bikes will be the future of transportation. What's holding them back is dumb legislation. In EU, they are limited to 25 km/h top speed and 250 W motors, which is not enough for everybody. Legislators think that if they are allowed to become more powerful then more people will die in accidents. True, but cars kill even more people so why don't we ban them?
For fit people in good weather, 250 W is plenty enough. But not for overweight people or people with movement disabilities. The energy required for movement is proportional to the weight, so it makes a ton of difference if the rider weights 100 kg or only 70 kg. To ride in rain or snow you need sturdier tires which means that the frame and motor needs to be heavier further contributing to the weight.
This issue is solvable but legislation is way behind. If, or when, e-bikes running at 30 - 35 km/h with 750 W motors becomes street-legal, they would become usable by almost anyone. You'd easily do a 15 km commute without breaking a sweat. I know because I've owned a bike like that which I used to ride in the winter. I sold it and bought a regular bike because I realized that I got zero exercise from it. The e-bike was more like a moped than a bike.
I agree that the current EU limits are overly strict, but it's also true that powerful ebikes can accelerate unexpectedly quickly, moreso than is safe for many inexperienced riders or those around them.
Allowing for more powerful motors is fine, and up to 30km/h for top speed is fine, but I think instant acceleration should be the thing that's somewhat more limited than now.
I also would love to see more safe ways to ride bikes, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.
"Dump legistration" is the way it is as increasing the power and speed limits with inadequate infrastructure can significantly increase risk for pedestrians and bike riders, likely more than risk posed by cars.
Most places already have adequate infrastructure for cars to be safe enough.
Infrastructure changes such as adding more ebike only lanes need to come first, and this will cost a lot and even infeasible without first reducing the number of car lanes. This will result in conflict of interest between car owners and people who want to introduce such infrastructure changes.
Conflict of interest can only be resolved by politics, and it will take a long time for politics to work out as changing people's perception generally takes a long time.
This is accurate. I really don’t see this sort of legislation taking off. Too many special interests would be against any sort of encroachment on the car infrastructure we have. AARP would definitely fight this, and so would the oil lobby. That by itself makes it an unlikely proposition in my view.
So, the future of transportation is an e-bike with more power so it can have higher top speeds, carry larger loads, and operate more safely in adverse weather conditions.
Of course, with higher top speeds you will probably want a windshield to protect the driver from bugs, debris, or precipitation. Hard to concentrate when you are getting hit in the face with stuff at 45 kph.
And really once the windshield is there, you should put a roof on too to provide better protection from the elements.
And a passenger seat or two. Maybe some storage. Maybe another wheel (or two) for better stability.
I know you are trolling, but what you are describing is an electric velomobile. Right now, they are too niche for mass production, but they are coming too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CURGm-BcaaM
I don't know what you are talking about. E-bikes that go 45km/h already exist and they are already street legal. They are treated like mopeds. You just need a license like every other vehicle on the street.
>I sold it and bought a regular bike because I realized that I got zero exercise from it.
I don't know why you are asking for more powerful bikes and then complain about getting less exercise. You can turn on eco mode on most e-bikes and get partial assist.
"Bikes" whose top speed is 45 km/h are classified as electric mopeds and require traffic insurance and driver's license. They are generally not allowed to use bike lanes. They also require registration plates and turn signalling lights. That makes them much heavier than regular e-bikes.
> I don't know why you are asking for more powerful bikes and then complain about getting less exercise.
Powerful e-bikes are nothing for me, but would be very useful for the rest of the population.
Many places where people bike a lot like Netherlands and Finland have bad weather. So obviously it’s not correlated. I remember biking a lot while studying despite bad weather (even snow and ice). I think that’s more a fear of newcomers who are not used to outdoor clothes.
Agree...I've been regular-biking year round in SLC for about 9 years. Rain isn't a problem with good gear, and fenders. Snow gets removed or melts quickly. It's the air quality on days with inversions that are the issue for me. I've biked in single digits, and you are quite warm when you push it.
I use an e-scooter rather than e-bike because 1) it's more compact 2) it's relatively cheaper 3) I only go short distances 4) I'm a lazy s.o.b.
Some people will need to sit while riding. Some people need to haul stuff. Some people may need to travel farther. Some people may prefer having weather-shielding. Future cities should allow for a range of micromobility options, not just one thing.
I wanted to make that same choice for the same reasons, but they turned out to be illegal to ride in public where I live (Sydney). Instead I bought an e-bike and it was probably the best purchase I've ever made.
Just wanted to point out the "GeoOrbital" wheel. It's an all-in-one battery-motor-wheel that can replace the front wheel of most conventional bikes in a minute or two. Presto! New eBike.
The Copenhagen Wheel https://www.superpedestrian.com/en/copenhagenwheel does the same with the backwheel and the website currently works. I saw a guy with it in SF at a signal and asked him how he liked it and he said "I love it!" so there's a random anecdote.
I have one of these and I really really liked it until the motor started cutting out while pressing the throttle. Sent it in for repairs twice, got a new ebike while waiting for them to send it back the second time. It was great for the 9 months it lasted, though.
Hmm. For my part, as a frequent bicycle rider, I really hate e-bikes. The reason is that it feels like I have much, much less control over speed.
Especially in situations where there's a lot of traffic or when for safety purposes one needs to ride slowly (e.g., in a shared-use space where there are also pedestrians around, like a college campus or something), being able to bike slowly is really nice.
On a real bike, I can bike slowly just by gearing down and pedaling very slowly. But on an e-bike, any pedaling at all makes it zip forward. I find that, frankly, terrifying, like I'm about to plow into cars or objects all the time, or I'm just riding the brakes.
I think you haven’t used a good ebike. I have a ebike with the shimano steps motor. I’ve been riding it almost a year commuting, and it’s very sublte and natural the way it adds power to my pedaling. There is a torque sensor and pedal speed sensor that makes all this happen.
I switch to my steel frame street/mountain bike without power assist and it just feels like I’m riding a heavier bike (which it isn’t)
Not really. You still have the same issues normal bikes have; all ebikes do is give power assist and more or less fill the same niche a gas or electric moped does, for the same price as a gas or electric moped.
You still have no real cargo capacity, you can't transport passengers, you are exposed to the elements, and more. While the power assist is of considerable benefit, it puts the price of the bike up immensely; many are the prices of a used motorcycle or scooter.
I feel its much better to get a 4 cycle scooter or motorcycle for that; if i'm spending 3k plus on a bike, getting one that can actually do traffic or be on roads is a plus. Yes there is licensing, but ebikes will fall under your states moped laws anyways and may require having an actual drivers license instead of a motorcycle endorsement.
For those who have e-bikes, what are your thoughts on riding them without the motor assistance? Is it heavy and difficult? Do they have battery regeneration from breaking?
I've been on the fence about getting one, and normally ride a crappy hybrid bike to and from work every day, which an e-bike would be useful for. But I also do 40+ mile trips on weekends and am afraid that if the battery dies, I'll be lugging a heavy bike around and exerting extra effort compared to a bike without a battery.
It’s basically impossible. Unpowered hub motors drag a lot. Unpowered mid-drives are better because they have clutches or freewheels, but you’re still pedaling a fifty-pound bike. Some ebikes do have regeneration triggered by brake lever switches but it’s pretty rare. Others have a regeneration mode switch. Most just don’t bother.
What you should understand about these bikes is the power delivered by the motor, and the power needed to recharge batteries in a useful time frame, greatly exceeds the continuous power a human would normally exert on the pedals.
Not sure I agree with that. It really depends on both the rider and bike. You can get a lighter weight (obviously with less range/power) mid-drive e-bike that is still manageable unpowered if you're not a small rider. It certainly isn't fun, but I've done it just fine on mostly-level ground with a sub-40lb bike.
Note that I have fond memories of pedalling girls around on the back of my unassisted bike back in the day, so I might not be an average rider.
It depends on the bike and on your condition. A normal cheap road bike weighs about 12 kg and an e-bike 22-24 kg. So riding the e-bike without e-assist is like riding a normal bike while being 10kg overweight (20 pounds maybe?) or like loading a bike with 10kg of cargo. It's doable, but is a lot heavier.
But there are also top of line electrified road bikes which are almost (almost!) like the road bikes they use in Tour de France but with an engine strapped onto them. They weigh about 11-13 kg and you'd have no trouble riding them without the assist. Of course those aren't cheap...
40 mile trips (60km?) are doable on e-bikes, but you'd have to conserve the battery. Like turning off the assist on flat terrain and only using it for riding uphill. Since you have a display indicating how much charge there's left you won't all of a sudden run out of power.
I have a middrive (BBS02) on a mountain bike and it absolutely sucks with a dead battery. You're not going to pedal much faster than 10MPH and it will be with decent effort unless you regularly cycle for exercise.
I have a giant quick e+ and it has the gears to ride it without the motor, but it really sucks. I did a ride where I exhausted the battery and it sucked the last couple of miles. It's a 50 pound bike once the motor dies.
It is heavy and difficult. Regenerative braking is rare. The GeoOrbital Wheel (which converts a regular bike to an electric bike by swapping out the front wheel) does charge the battery when you're not using the throttle.
Why not use both? E-bike for commuting and regular bike for fun? Or why not get a spare battery to carry on long rides just in case?
This is why I think the moped is in practice the better choice until this tech matures. Over 100mpg isn't bad, won't leave you stranded, and isn't as much of a magnet for theft.
I did see an ad for some electric moped with removable batteries. You simply pull up to a gas station and swap your empties for charged ones, just like propane tanks. No waiting on a charger, but it would require total adoption like gasoline did for it to be practical.
I use a Solowheel unicycle. It is perfect for me to run my errands around my neighboorhood but wouldn't use it to commute to work. The only problem so far is that they are rather on the heavy side otherwise i'd commute between public transportation and the final destination. They seem hard to ride but once you spend 10 hours on one it becomes second nature, almost easier than walking..
The solowheel is very portable and flexible in terms of maneuvrability, though a bit heavy to carry for long distances. Because it only has one wheel you can get better angles and turn faster. It is very fun to ride and a light workout. The segway I haven’t tried one but I’ll most likely enjoy it. I’ll try one when I get the chance.
The main reason I prefer renting e-bikes instead of using my own bike isn't the electric power. It's the convenience and not having to worry about my bike getting stolen. If I only want to bike one way and not round trip, no worries.
If I was to own an e-bike, I would want to not have to worry about it getting stolen. Everything would have to be like e-bikes you rent. All the parts would need to be integrated and not easily removable (lights, seat, etc). I don't want to waste 5 minutes locking/unlocking my bike every time I want to stop somewhere and have to carry around my lights. I would also want GPS so I can track my bike if it gets stolen. Until I have I bike like that, I will continue to buy the cheapest crappiest bikes I can find or rent bikes because people suck.
My non-e-bike has bolts in place of quick releases for wheels and saddle and a bolted-on dynamo-powered headlight. That essentially eliminates component theft. It takes about 20 seconds to use my u-lock to attach to a convenient pole or bike rack.
It's really quite simple to make your bike a less attractive target for theft.
I've looked into folding electrics so I could take one on the BART. Many of them are too small if you're 6' or more, and the others seem like a PITA to actually portage anywhere like up stairs. Even if you can get one into your workplace though that doesn't solve the problem for anywhere else you might go, like a restaurant. And if you're only concerned about work I would hope to Ja that your employer has secure bicycle parking since it's far cheaper/more compact than car parking and probably correlates to healthier employees.
For the past six months I've been driving my car 13 miles on the motorway to the city park-and-ride, then taking my folding e-bike out of the boot and cycling the last couple of miles to work.
I use the building's freight lift and keep the cycle behind my desk. Work visitors INSIST on touching the handlebars whilst talking to me.
I wear hi-viz (ISO 20471 Class III) hardshell jacket/softshell jacket and cycle helmet. I have daylight blinkers at front and back of cycle. Also, Bring-Bring bell.
I get "Nice Bike" on the way in, and on the way out. Car appears to be moping.
243 comments
[ 0.71 ms ] story [ 261 ms ] thread"Here Come the Electrics. Could E-Bikes Be the Electric Revolution Cities Need?"
You can also apply Betteridge's Law of Headlines to the real one easier :-)
come join our discussion at the ebike discord https://discord.gg/6fRvwSx
No, the bigger issue with front drive is that the front wheel has less weight over it (so significantly less traction) and that should it ever lose traction, you are more or less guaranteed to crash while the rear wheel slipping is perfectly recoverable. This is exacerbated since a human motor knows not to turn the power on going through a turn in the wet, but e-bike motors don't bring any such intelligence.
I converted an old trek steel frame touring bike and moved the conversion kit to a modern hardtail after a month of commuting. It didn’t feel safe.
That said what you want is a mid drive bafang bbshd. Dead simple conversion for any bike.
I don’t use my ebike for small errands because it’s too easy to just rip expensive stuff off of it while locked up.
Also, the picture shows a rider with no helmet which is insane. I wear a motorcycle helmet and leathers. The speed limit for ebikes on roads in CA is 28, which is deadly with even a normal bike helmet.
Finally the article says that the new models are lighter because they’ve integrated battery in frames.
Totally false, the weight is not significantly lower and the in-frame battery means when your battery wears out in 3-10 years, you’ll have to pay the maker to replace it if it’s possible at all.
I highly recommend converting yourself using a bafang bbshd
I have a 1500w motor and share a road with semi trucks
0. Ivers R. Systematic reviews of bicycle helmet research. Inj Prev. 2007;13(3):190. doi:10.1136/ip.2007.015966 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598379/
By the way, helmets on bicyclists tend to make car drivers behave like even bigger jackholes than usual. https://psyarxiv.com/nxw2k "... public health research might be best served by shifting focus to risk elimination rather than harm mitigation."
Once you factor in all the variables, the helmet is only a small part of the equation, and probably not going to do you much good should you find yourself under the wheels of a semi-truck. Yet having that piece of styrofoam strapped to your head has given you the (possibly misplaced) confidence to go fast with semi-trucks.
Alternatively, if it's a modified bicycle, it's simply illegal on public roads.
Now I do wear a bike helmet when biking for other reasons, but I give trucks wide leeway.
EU vehicle category L1e, if you want to look up the exact word in your own language.
I don't think there are specific speed limits for bike lanes, or bikes, anywhere in the EU (but of course I could be wrong).
My 18 miles commute is 2 miles of sleepy suburban traffic and 16 miles on the SF Bay Trail (IOW: flat dirt track with no cars allowed.) Even if it were all dirt track, I'd still be wearing my helmet.
If you are shunted in the rear on the way to work in your car you might have a inconvenient morning and an insurance claim. If the same thing happens on your bike you could quite literally die from a head injury.
I skated for a long time and didn't wear a helmet because of comfort/looks. I've become a bit more wise since and won't share the road with cars without my helmet when I'm cycling
- Driver mergers in to me too soon
- Passenger or driver opens door in to my path
- Driver making turn cuts me off and I have to swerve or brake suddenly
- Driver does a right-hand hook across bike lane to make a right turn.
In almost all these cases I’m going to be crushed by a moving vehicle. A helmet won’t save me.
As for being rear ended... I’ve personally never felt like I had a “rear end” close call on a bike.
And with the boom of food delivery,mostly done by bike, the situation got a lot worse
Just two hours ago a guy working for glovo merged on the sidewalk while I was trying to cross on the zebra walks and almost hit me.
He was using one hand, wasn't looking, with the other hand was speaking at the phone and didn't stop at the red light
No need to specify they are not allowed on sidewalks, but who's gonna fine them?
It happens constantly, but bikers usually think that cars are to blame, when cars usually let me cross when the light is green, they usually stop at the red light and they usually don't ride on the sidewalk
Give people bikes that can go at 30km/h and you have the recipe for a disaster
We already have regular and e-mopeds but at least they are heavy regulated and need a mandatory insurance (at least in Italy)
That said, unless someone is already frail being hit by a bike is nothing like being hit by a car. I’ve had two red-light running bicyclists crash in to me (once while biking, once while skateboarding). I’ve also been in three separate cars that got rear-ended (none of those times was I driving). The level of pain is an order of magnitude different.
You're completely right!
Cars are engineered to reduce the damages of a direct impact.
Bikes are not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_safety_through_vehi...
Studies agree that the damages are mostly caused by speed
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24435732
E-bikes can go at very high speeds (30km/h is more than enough to be deadly) and can do it effortlessly, which means the even bikers that aren't expert can go at such high speeds, increasing the risk of hurting someone else or themselves.
Add to that the fact that a car can break or avoid obstacles in a much more efficient way than a bike could ever do (think about heavy breaking with a bike at 25 km/h under heavy rain on the pavet and then think about it on a car).
I'm not a supporter of cars, I've been car free for a few years now, but I don't think bikes are less dangerous for pedestrians.
There are simply less of them around.
> The level of pain is an order of magnitude different
The maximum level of pain I suffered was because of my bad teeth
I was in a very bad car accident (a tire detached from my car while driving on the highway and I lost control), the pain was a joke compared to that.
Pain is not a strong indicator of dangerous physical damage.
For example internal bleeding is usually painless.
>Add to that the fact that a car can break or avoid obstacles in a much more efficient way than a bike could ever do
That's obviously false. Just consider the stuff that BMX bikes can do in terms of maneuvering. Or even normal bikes. Try driving on a car through a busy pedestrian street. On a bike it's a piece of cake, and you won't have to stop even once.
First of all, it's all in the news, I'm not making things up
https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-ped...
Or you can look at this, specifically the chapters "Cyclist Deaths and Impairment", "Cyclist Helmets Statistics" and "Staying Safe while Cycling"
https://bayareabicyclelaw.com/safety-laws/bike-stats/
and we don't have enough data (AKA it's not been collected until few years ago) to say that "it's barely even an issue"
Secondly, bikers most of all kill themselves.
"One in five people injured on Australian roads and paths is a cyclist, according to a new Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report"
https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/injury/pedal-cyclist-injury-...
Is it because of the road conditions, the presence of cars or other vehicles?
Or is it because cyclists underestimate the risks?
According to the same study, motorcyclists only account for 2.7% of the hospitalizations.
They share the road with cars as well, they go faster than bikes on the same roads.
What could be different?
Could it be that the safety measures engineered in motorbikes and the safety measures motorbikers take to protect themselves are actually useful to reduce physical damages?
Even Netherlands has a big problem with bikers dying more than ever because of underestimating risks.
https://www.iamexpat.nl/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/death-toll-...
> That's obviously false. Just consider the stuff that BMX bikes can do in terms of maneuvering
An expert biker on a BMX you mean!
If I give a BMX to my mother, 71 years old, she couldn't even ride it.
It's like saying "now look what this rally pilot can do on terrain with their fine tuned 4wd monster car"
Bike helmets are designed for low speed crashes NOT involving vehicles.
Now I still wear one myself but I don’t fool myself that doing so brings me any protection from someone driving an SUV who thinks they’ll be late getting to a 24 supermarket if don’t just squeeze by me.
It’s like putting an oven glove on an egg and hitting it with a hammer.
A quick look a Strava’s stats will show you that even weak club cyclists like me, living somewhere pretty flattish, can already cruise about at over 20mph pretty easily.
Pedal assist ebikes just expand that ability to a wider number of people.
Just look at the number of people who regularly crash in amateur crit races.
We generally survive non-vehicle related crashes at these speeds pretty well and people on ebikes will too.
It's just that piloting multi-ton metal vehicles at bone-shattering velocities has been normalized. It's always been insane and deadly, but there was an actual concerted effort to normalize it and that worked. I'm not even joking. "Speed demons" were replaced by "Jay walkers" and people have been getting maimed and killed ever since.
"The Real Reason Jaywalking Is A Crime" (Adam Ruins Everything) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxopfjXkArM
If you stop a moment and think carefully, they already do!
it's called airbag and it's been a required safety feature for more than a decade now...
Also, you really -want- to have a helmet on in a race car - you'll typically have an unpadded roll cage right by your head, and the FIA-approved padding for roll cages is designed to work well with helmets, not with heads. I used to dread long road sections on rallies as I knew that an accident would be a real mess if there was any contact with the cage. There's more room in a road car, and there's padding / airbags etc to cushion you from impact on hard structures.
Also, the style of bicycle is often different. Hybrid and town bikes are far less common the US than Europe. I suspect that an easy-step over, big tire, upright town bicycle is easier (and this safer) to use.
Mostly, I'm suggesting better bicycle infrastructure is one reason people may be less likely to wear helmets in Europe vs the US. And not making any claims about how safe a helmet in the US actually is or is not.
An acquaintance of mine was killed running into a slightly raised piece of ground that he didn’t see... wasn’t wearing a helmet and was thrown over his handlebars. Doctors say he would have walked away if he had been wearing a helmet.
There's also evidence that requiring helmets reduces cycling among the general population. Partially because it's an extra thing to buy/maintain, but it also creates more work for commuters - they have to redo their hair at the office.
Residents of Amsterdam don't seem to wear helmets at all, except for high-speed training rides/racing. And they seem to do ok like that.
1)Most cities suck at biking infrastructure, including Europe if you exclude the poster childs like Amsterdam or Copenhagen.
2)It's not wearing a helmet that reduces cycling throughout the population it's the lack of infrastructure. Helmet necessity is a direct effect of that not the cause.
3)You can't make helmets a requirement, it's up to you if you can live(pun not intended) with the consequences of an accident without a helmet or not.
https://flic.kr/p/WRp6js
There's potentially more damage from that, to society.
No, it's easy to argue because cars inarguably cause way more deaths than bikes. So when people switch to cars from bikes, it's indirectly killing more people. Any measure that prevents bike use leads to more deaths.
I live in Austria where few cyclists wear helmets yet my girlfriend who works in the local hospital sees patients coming in with serious head injuries on a daily basis from biking accidents that could have easily been prevented by wearing a helmet. Since then we both wear our helmets religiously.
You don't even have to get hit by a car. An unfortunate collision with a texting pedestrian, some dog on a leash jumping in front of you or another cyclist could be enough to smack your melon on the asphalt.
Just because you hear Europeans aren't wearing helmets doesn't mean it's the model to follow. I see wearing a helmet the same as wearing a seatbelt. Sure I never needed it since I never had an accident and it feels slightly uncomfortable but I know it could save my life.
It's up to you how much you value your head.
I highly doubt ebikes have a 50% share in Belgium. Do you have any references on that claim? Last year I visited Belgium's 4 major cities and almost every cyclist I saw was on some old half broken bicycle.
You can lock helmets with bikes if you want. I used to lock my helmet with my u-lock on my bike, so if they cut off the helmet, then it isn't a very useful helmet. I now bring it with me in my bag mostly for hygenic reasons although.
Expanded foam helmets are fragile by design. They are design to be disposable with even small knocks. So even accidentally banging them against your frame, dlock or solid post is a bad idea even if you can’t visibly see any damage.
You’re recommended to replace them at regular intervals also due to sweat damage.
Then again 3cm of expanded polystyrene foam vs a metal box with a engine in it... probably like a surfer forgetting to replace their “anti-shark bite” medallion anyway.
Very popular here in Sweden. A little easier to stuff in your bag.
"According to the Velofollies survey as well as other sources last year’s [2018] e-bike sales stood at slightly over a quarter million units; some 251,500 to be more precise. This accounts for a big 14.3 percent growth compared to the total of the year before. It makes electric bicycles by far the biggest category of the Belgian market with a market share that stands at close to 50 percent."
https://www.bike-eu.com/sales-trends/nieuws/2019/07/market-r...
This way, even if you are technically correct, you can better convey knowledge when it appears that communication isn't occurring.
analysis: https://www.treehugger.com/bikes/why-dont-americans-wear-hel...
A head injury that results from speed or post-strike collisions is still recorded as a "cyclist head injury" so I don't think your points change the numbers.
Please note, I'm not trying to argue against helmets. The point is that arguments over helmets deflect the conversation away from the people sailing around recklessly in two ton metal boxes. Every time there’s a collision involving a cyclist, the question is "was he wearing a helmet?", not, "was the driver paying attention?"
The safest places to bicycle are in the nations where there's the lowest rates of cyclists wearing helmets. This is a car problem, not a bicycle problem.
Once I hit a curb, went over the handlebars, and skinned up my hands/knees and my wrists hurt pretty bad for a week or so after. Another time I wiped out at the bottom of a hill, tore a huge gash in the side of my knee. Then there was the time I chipped a tooth on a curb when trying to ride no-handed.
In all the falls I experienced, none of them involved a head injury that a helmet would have prevented (the chipped tooth incident could have been prevented by wearing a mouth guard, or by not being stupid). So based on that, it feels like helmets are useless.
Of course, in reality there is a huge difference between a kid riding a bicycle at single-digit MPH on neighborhood streets and back-woods trails, vs. going 15 - 20 MPH on roads or paved trails. At those speeds, it would probably be impossible for me to break my fall using just hands and feet, not to mention the possibility of getting distracted hand running into a street sign or tree branch. Logically I'm aware of all this, but still I have trouble with maintaining proper helmet discipline.
Chargers are a pain since you want an 80-20 charge cycle.
The name brands have options for this and you know what battery cells you’re getting.
I used the meanwell hlg 54a to make my own chargers. They are the best value and ul listed if you don’t mind doing your own connections and have a voltage meter
- No safe parking anywhere. So far so good but it's only a matter of time before my bike gets stolen.
- Range. Much too short (less than 40km in my experience).
Yet, it's fantastic. It changed my life. It almost totally replaced my motorbike for every trip except the longest ones (I live in Paris so most trips are short).
I will say that I don't especially recommend it unless you want to pedal a lot (or live in a very hilly area). If you're lazy like me I'd recommend a hub motor - having to change gears constantly and every time I come to a stop gets really old really fast.
This tech is amazing...
Saying that I stick at the low end. 50W - 150W is still very noticeable assistance, but still mostly a bike. 500+W is really a very different category.
I'd really like to see more support for class 2 bikes on bike paths around the bay area. Class 2, which does not require pedaling, gets around the "I'm too sweaty when I get to work" issue. My dream: a bike highway to the silicon valley from outlying areas.
Still pretty slow for full leathers which would be heavy, hot, sweaty, horrible to pedal in and a pain changing in and out of.
A full face mounting bike helmet might be a lot lighter and offer very good protection for the speeds you are travelling as designed for fast downhill riding. The thing with motorcycle helmets is they are heavy and not designed for high intensity cardio so hard to breath in doing anything slightly intensive. Motorcross style helmets have a larger chin and visor area to allow for better air flow for breathing plus vision as motorcross can be quite physical.
Also instead of full leathers if you are interested in safety the motorcycle Kevlar jeans and tops should be a little more comfortable cycling although I’d still find them not great for any physical work. Another option would be one of the motorcycle pressure suits for your torso, I think they do them for mounting biking to and offer a bit of airflow with the padding. A bit more convenient than full leathers, abrasion wouldn’t be the main issue at your speeds, it’d be impact force.
When you're hit by a motorist and slide to a stop on asphalt, there's really no such thing as overkill when it comes to road rash protection. Speaking from personal experience.
Kelvar should be sufficient for abrasion at 28km/h, it’s used in motorcycle gear where you go much faster. Also gear with 1000d ballistic nylon in the abrasion zones, same deal used for motorcycle clothing.
I’ve had a few offs 60-80+ kmph wearing textile gear on unsealed roads, dirt tracks etc and textiles have stood up well, just picked myself up and the bike and jumped back on.
Cycling on the road impact will be a far bigger issue than abrasion.
I can’t imagine cycling in leather, they are designed to be tight fitting, cut for sitting in a fairly static position, hot and sweaty. Leathers are not comfortable in hot weather on a motorcycle, I just can’t imagine having to pedal wearing them or doing anything physical.
That's nice as a sport but we are mostly talking about commuting here. The assist an e-bike gives you is nice if you don't want to sweat and have to go uphill.
These bikes are available for rent nearly all of the time, except for when we close down a few streets for the spring fair. So, adoption isn't going to happen very fast in places where there is no appetite. We have cheap gas here and A/C in our cars.
No one is proposing e-bikes for 40+ mile commutes. That can only be replaced by commuter rail and in-fill housing.
Half of all car trips are less than 15 miles and a lot of those could be replaced with e-bikes.
I just went to the site where I do all my purchases, and that same bike is at the same price tag as an ebike of medium quality.
I reckon this country is a little particular when it comes to economics, but buying an ebike is far from cheap around here. Until that changes, the bulk of people will use just regular means of transport in this country.
Besides that, I do think that electric vehicles are the best way to move around for distances in the low miles.
They even have e-models..
Agreed on the second point.
But trying to convince people of that without putting them on an e-bike is kind of hard.
For that kind of money, you're buying a pretty solid scooter or a cheap car. Nevermind if you want a cargo bike or Bakfiets. Having the infrastructure / city planning to make this worthwhile is definitely an important second part. I'm not going to park a $4K bike just anywhere.
My big issues with motorized bicycles are lanes to ride and rules of the road. I see people riding them on sidewalks, in streets, and in bike lanes. It is almost like people on motorcycles who ride in the break down lane or lane split (both of which are illegal in Texas).
We already had/have a HUGE problem with the escooters, people getting run down by kids on the sidewalks and riding them in traffic downtown.
I am for this 100%, but please put down infrastructure and some sort of rules of the road and enforce it.
While the rented scooters downtown have been a mess during the roll out they have visibly reduced downtown auto traffic (much of which my hypothesis is was Lyft / Uber / Taxis).
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsBCu-sSWII
Where are you suggesting that they ride?
Adding high-speed (i.e., greater than five mph) vehicles to that mix is a recipe for disaster.
This not only makes it easier to share the sidewalk with vehicles, it also improves the flow when there are a lot of foot commuters with different walking speeds.
I live in a city where pedestrians frequently share the sidewalk with both bicycles and electric mopeds. It works because people pay attention to what's going on around them and generally work together to try keep the traffic flowing smoothly.
I am not against dedicated roads for bikes (although depending on the city's density, they can just end up as a second sidewalk), but I also think it shouldn't be treated as a prerequisite for developing a bike culture.
If bicyclists want this mode of transportation to be taken seriously, they need to start self-policing in a major way. So far I'm seeing not even a hint of that.
Hence the situation you end up with here: some go into the meager bike lanes, some feel more comfortable taking the lane, and some feel safer on protected walk lanes, aka sidewalks.
How much of a huge problem is that that you have seen personally? I personally have found that everyone loves to complain about them, but I never find much evidence of people being run down by them (in what I've seen)
My wife drives for lyft and spends a considerable amount of time downtown and has almost had accidents with people riding escooters in the street, to the point we engaged our insurance agent and asked about liability (we were assured if hit in the middle of the road and not in a bike lane, crossing lane or sidewalk we would bee free of liability and she now has 3 cameras in her vehicle).
An last year at PAX south in downtown SA I was walking on the sidewalk and hearing people yelling to move because they were having all sorts of fun chasing each other and almost running people down.
So I am not complaining to complain. I assume you live in San Antonio and are downtown quite a bit? People leave them everywhere, they fall over in the streets, you cannot say you don't see this.
Sadly I think SF is a good special case where it works well most of the year:
1. City is pretty compact. It's not exactly 7mix7mi, but not far off either.
2. Weather is pretty good most of the year. (no ice/snow/freezing rain, etc) Yes you can cycle in fog. ;)
3. Speed limit is 20mph in residential, and 30mph on busier roads, but congestion generally makes the impossible. Bike lanes are normally free.
4. Bike lanes/paths/routes are expanding throughout the city. Including nicely protected routes.
5. Parking and Gas are expensive here. I was just in Texas and filled up a car for < $20. I can't remember when I did that last.
Sure it's a dream, and I wish the article would come true here. Imagine how cool it would be to have tons of bikes on the road and so many less cars/ICE zooming around? Ok, maybe I'm just not a car person. ;)
There are hiccups though:
1. Carrying groceries/etc. You can't get a shopping cart full and take it home.
2. Kids...getting them to school. Cargo bikes here are an option, but they need to be a certain age and I do worry about safety. :/
3. It does rain...and ridding in the rain sucks. Most parts of the US get it so much worse though, it feels hard to complain.
4. Commuting via bike to work does take time/effort. Carrying a change of clothes, showering, etc, etc.
I also use it regularly to carry groceries via saddle bags and find it to be much more convenient than fighting the parking lot at my local trader joes. Also, it is generally flat here so I don't find the need to shower and change clothes but then again, I bike to work in jeans and a t-shirt so maybe it would be different in a suit?
We don't necessarily need an one-size-fits-all solution to fix traffic emissions, it's fine if people in different cities end up doing different things.
[1] https://www.radpowerbikes.com/
To clarify, ebike batteries across manufacturers should be standardized.
Which is a given in the winter :(
I knew some researchers who were specifically looking at the question of bicyclist exposure to air pollution by pedaling around town with nephalometers (IIRC). I don’t remember what their conclusions were, if any. I should look that up.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896971...
https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/fuming-air-pollution-and-c...
The being able to easily keep up with traffic is what I miss when I switch to my regular bike, which I had been comuting with for years.
Also I ride it more than my traditional bike because it is easier. (I rode to work today) Parking is easier too though I’m still a little nervous leaving it on the street (I have bike cages at home/work)
I’ll second your recommendation of giving it a try.
I usually wear regular clothing (like jeans and hoodie) and add to it when necessary (long johns in the winter, maybe a power-stretch jacket).
Its only about 35-40 minutes for me so I can be a little lighter on the clothing. A balaclava for my face (Its a a ski mask with an big circular opening for my nose and eyes). Thats usually enough, but I have a thin hat that fits under the helmet. my work shirts are golf shirts and wick sweat away, but wool or polypro long underwear is helpful when its really really cold. You don't want to get wet from sweat, because it will suck the heat out of you. I usually just use normal pants. I have a flease jacket and a windproof shell on top.
I use wool glove liners and good windproof gloves. My hands can still get cold. Especially when its windy along the river. I'm experimenting with usb li-on glove warmers, which seem to help on the two times I've used them. They're kind bulky in my gloves and I don't love that.
(I've seen people with fixed hand warmers on there bikes but I haven't gone that far). Ski googles too (I wear glasses so that helps the wind in my eye problem).
Good socks too. I lower my seat in the winter to make it easier to touch ground if I hit ice.
If nothing else, it's easily worth the experience of getting the kids to and from school. It takes less time and it's enjoyable instead of aggravating. Win-win.
I'm finding that, in my city, we tend to move faster than traffic if there's any traffic at all. Cars might go faster when they're not stopped, but they're spending most their time queued up at traffic lights and stop signs. Bikes get to go to ride right past those lines.
If only he’d thought of electrifying available people-powered systems and miniaturizing as well adding capacity rather than re-inventing things. Of course hindsight... but what if he’d seen things differently.
it was awe-inspiring and admirable from an engineering standpoint, but painfully misapplied and dorky from a societal one.
kamen could have used this technological advance on any number of (existing) personal transport machines, but he chose to invent his own, as inventors are wont to do.
Its just a much nicer platform, all-electric. I see it getting much, much wider adoption ..
I do suggest some bike handling skills and helmet for anyone who tries though: You're still on a bike fully exposed to the world. Only now you're doing 25mph down a trail beset by jaywalking peds and lane jumping cars.
Do some high speed stops / slick road training - learn how to handle bad situations. Ride safe and wave at us on manpowered models :)
I'm personally using EUC to work in food delivery and I commute to and from area of work. I can make 130km a day with peak speed of 25mph. This is my between-programming-jobs endeavour. I also commuted 10miles one way to my office and it allowed me to skip traffic jams.
For fit people in good weather, 250 W is plenty enough. But not for overweight people or people with movement disabilities. The energy required for movement is proportional to the weight, so it makes a ton of difference if the rider weights 100 kg or only 70 kg. To ride in rain or snow you need sturdier tires which means that the frame and motor needs to be heavier further contributing to the weight.
This issue is solvable but legislation is way behind. If, or when, e-bikes running at 30 - 35 km/h with 750 W motors becomes street-legal, they would become usable by almost anyone. You'd easily do a 15 km commute without breaking a sweat. I know because I've owned a bike like that which I used to ride in the winter. I sold it and bought a regular bike because I realized that I got zero exercise from it. The e-bike was more like a moped than a bike.
Allowing for more powerful motors is fine, and up to 30km/h for top speed is fine, but I think instant acceleration should be the thing that's somewhat more limited than now.
"Dump legistration" is the way it is as increasing the power and speed limits with inadequate infrastructure can significantly increase risk for pedestrians and bike riders, likely more than risk posed by cars.
Most places already have adequate infrastructure for cars to be safe enough.
Infrastructure changes such as adding more ebike only lanes need to come first, and this will cost a lot and even infeasible without first reducing the number of car lanes. This will result in conflict of interest between car owners and people who want to introduce such infrastructure changes.
Conflict of interest can only be resolved by politics, and it will take a long time for politics to work out as changing people's perception generally takes a long time.
This is accurate. I really don’t see this sort of legislation taking off. Too many special interests would be against any sort of encroachment on the car infrastructure we have. AARP would definitely fight this, and so would the oil lobby. That by itself makes it an unlikely proposition in my view.
Of course, with higher top speeds you will probably want a windshield to protect the driver from bugs, debris, or precipitation. Hard to concentrate when you are getting hit in the face with stuff at 45 kph.
And really once the windshield is there, you should put a roof on too to provide better protection from the elements.
And a passenger seat or two. Maybe some storage. Maybe another wheel (or two) for better stability.
And then you have an e-car.
>I sold it and bought a regular bike because I realized that I got zero exercise from it.
I don't know why you are asking for more powerful bikes and then complain about getting less exercise. You can turn on eco mode on most e-bikes and get partial assist.
> I don't know why you are asking for more powerful bikes and then complain about getting less exercise.
Powerful e-bikes are nothing for me, but would be very useful for the rest of the population.
For fit people in good weather.
The second part is more important than the first. You do leave out convenience and more with regards to carrying goods that these cannot offer.
Some people will need to sit while riding. Some people need to haul stuff. Some people may need to travel farther. Some people may prefer having weather-shielding. Future cities should allow for a range of micromobility options, not just one thing.
https://www.geoo.com/
(Hmm, I can't reach their site at the moment.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeoOrbital
The geoorbital comes off in a jiffy and you can take it with you (e.g. when you have to lock you bike outside) but the Copenhagen is so stylish.
Especially in situations where there's a lot of traffic or when for safety purposes one needs to ride slowly (e.g., in a shared-use space where there are also pedestrians around, like a college campus or something), being able to bike slowly is really nice.
On a real bike, I can bike slowly just by gearing down and pedaling very slowly. But on an e-bike, any pedaling at all makes it zip forward. I find that, frankly, terrifying, like I'm about to plow into cars or objects all the time, or I'm just riding the brakes.
I switch to my steel frame street/mountain bike without power assist and it just feels like I’m riding a heavier bike (which it isn’t)
You still have no real cargo capacity, you can't transport passengers, you are exposed to the elements, and more. While the power assist is of considerable benefit, it puts the price of the bike up immensely; many are the prices of a used motorcycle or scooter.
I feel its much better to get a 4 cycle scooter or motorcycle for that; if i'm spending 3k plus on a bike, getting one that can actually do traffic or be on roads is a plus. Yes there is licensing, but ebikes will fall under your states moped laws anyways and may require having an actual drivers license instead of a motorcycle endorsement.
I've been on the fence about getting one, and normally ride a crappy hybrid bike to and from work every day, which an e-bike would be useful for. But I also do 40+ mile trips on weekends and am afraid that if the battery dies, I'll be lugging a heavy bike around and exerting extra effort compared to a bike without a battery.
What you should understand about these bikes is the power delivered by the motor, and the power needed to recharge batteries in a useful time frame, greatly exceeds the continuous power a human would normally exert on the pedals.
Note that I have fond memories of pedalling girls around on the back of my unassisted bike back in the day, so I might not be an average rider.
But there are also top of line electrified road bikes which are almost (almost!) like the road bikes they use in Tour de France but with an engine strapped onto them. They weigh about 11-13 kg and you'd have no trouble riding them without the assist. Of course those aren't cheap...
40 mile trips (60km?) are doable on e-bikes, but you'd have to conserve the battery. Like turning off the assist on flat terrain and only using it for riding uphill. Since you have a display indicating how much charge there's left you won't all of a sudden run out of power.
Why not use both? E-bike for commuting and regular bike for fun? Or why not get a spare battery to carry on long rides just in case?
I did see an ad for some electric moped with removable batteries. You simply pull up to a gas station and swap your empties for charged ones, just like propane tanks. No waiting on a charger, but it would require total adoption like gasoline did for it to be practical.
If I was to own an e-bike, I would want to not have to worry about it getting stolen. Everything would have to be like e-bikes you rent. All the parts would need to be integrated and not easily removable (lights, seat, etc). I don't want to waste 5 minutes locking/unlocking my bike every time I want to stop somewhere and have to carry around my lights. I would also want GPS so I can track my bike if it gets stolen. Until I have I bike like that, I will continue to buy the cheapest crappiest bikes I can find or rent bikes because people suck.
It's really quite simple to make your bike a less attractive target for theft.
As a alternative to using a bike lock I just fold it up and bring it with me.
It’s still a heavy lump to carry any distance but it fits under a desk just great.
(Amusingly they now make an ebike Brompton too).
That's what the telescopic seatpost is for. "550mm but will extend up to 710mm so suits taller riders up to approximately 6'6" or 1.98m."[1]
Working on the saddle to handlebar drop is another thing. But the H-Type handlebar with the 60mm higher stem will likely solve that.
Of course you can bring your folded Brompton to a restaurant. Leave it in the wardrobe! :)
[1] https://www.brompton.com/brompton-swe/uk-store/parts/essenti...
I use the building's freight lift and keep the cycle behind my desk. Work visitors INSIST on touching the handlebars whilst talking to me.
I wear hi-viz (ISO 20471 Class III) hardshell jacket/softshell jacket and cycle helmet. I have daylight blinkers at front and back of cycle. Also, Bring-Bring bell.
I get "Nice Bike" on the way in, and on the way out. Car appears to be moping.