electric bikes on centuries - Page 6 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

01-31-2007, 03:01 PM

Bill Baka wrote:

:: I have only had take advantage of a SAG ride once (rain) and the van
:: was already crammed to the max. Fitting an electric or bent in would
:: have been impossible. The SAG guy was more than a little busy
:: collecting wet and frozen cyclists.
:: Bill Baka

Some 'bents require no more space than your typical bike, even less for
some.

01-31-2007, 04:35 PM

Bill Bushnell wrote:
> In rec.bicycles.misc Bill Baka <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>> I took a look and can say that the bike looks less than ideal. If it has
>> a motorized bottom bracket then there is no possibility for regenerative
>> braking, which is a big NO-NO in the electric world.
>
> Regenerative braking is overrated. The best implementations of regenerative
> braking occur on electric bikes with hub motors, and even then there are limits
> on the current that can be dumped into a battery. If one rides in hills, the
> overall efficiency is higher when running a smaller, lighter motor through the
> bicycle's gears.
>
> Below is a link to a white paper that discusses why regenerative braking is
> generally not practical on electric bikes.
>
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
I can't get to that site since my firewall thinks it is bad, so.....
Anyway, I get the part about regenerative braking since there is nowhere
near the amount of mass/inertia like a car, so it would only be
effective on downhill runs. That, in itself, would take the fun out of
trying for the fastest possible speed on a downhill. Fast descents are
the reward for chugging up a hill in the first place.
Conclusion? It's a wash.
Bill Baka

01-31-2007, 04:39 PM

Roger Zoul wrote:
> Bill Baka wrote:
>
> :: I have only had take advantage of a SAG ride once (rain) and the van
> :: was already crammed to the max. Fitting an electric or bent in would
> :: have been impossible. The SAG guy was more than a little busy
> :: collecting wet and frozen cyclists.
> :: Bill Baka
>
> Some 'bents require no more space than your typical bike, even less for
> some.
>
>
Are you talking about folding bents? A bent bent? There is one guy in my
area who uses a bent and it is definitely about twice as big as any of
my bikes. What I remember most is the God awful long second chain from
the front pedals and gears to the rear.
I don't think that would bend.
Any examples in mind?
Bill Baka

01-31-2007, 10:39 PM

Werehatrack wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:59:07 -0700, "Daryl Hunt"
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> may have said:
>
>
>>I think there are a few reasons you don't see Low Speed Electric Bicycles
>>(legal term).
>>
>>First of all, they would only be really able to ride in the 10 mile run.
>>Range past that just isn't really going to happen. Claiming otherwise is
>>sort of like claiming that your Moutain Bike can maintain 30 mph over a 60
>>mile race.
>
>
> Breathalysers can usually shed a lot of light on such claims.
>
> In any event, more than half of what's required in order to go 30mph
> for 60 miles is a rider who's capable of that level of sustained
> output. Bikes sold with such claims wouldn't be marketed to the
> riders who might be able to achieve the result with a *suitable* bike,
> because even the marketing people are smart enough to know that the
> real racers are not going to believe the hype. Well, *most* of them
> won't, anyway.
>
>
>>And don't forget about that carberator that gets your car 200
>>mpg. Now, you can go the long distance but, even when you are helping the
>>motor by pedalling most of the time, I doubt you want to finish the last
>>half of the race pedalling that extra 40 pounds or so.
>
>
> Nasty laws of physics, we hates them! Give us a nice fantasy world
> where we can do what we likes!
>
>
>>I think the biggest is that the "Pure" cyclists make the Low Speed Electric
>>Bicycles (pedal assist) feel about as welcome as an absessed tooth.
>
>
> Actually, in a non-race long-ride setting, I think some of the snobs
> would welcome (or at least not snub) *certain* riders aboard an
> electric-assist bike. If the rider has a physical limitation (other
> than simple lack of conditioning) which makes it impractical or
> impossible to participate without the assist, even the majority of the
> purists would, in my limited experience, accept such a rider and bike.
> You're still right, though. There would be a group that would stand
> well away, never approach, say nothing supportive, and make snide
> remarks; it would just be much smaller than would be the case if the
> assisted bike was being used by (for instance) a mere couch potato.
>

But you ignore the possibility that a couch potato trying to become a
non-couch potato might need a little assistance going uphill while in
the process of getting into decent shape. Maybe just having a little
help with the tougher parts will keep the couch potato from becoming
discouraged by the process.

That said, there will always be the "tour-de-France wannabes" who will
snub anyone that isn't a fellow wannabe (and must have the "right"
clothes, the "right" bike, etc)

Janet

02-01-2007, 05:24 AM

Bill Baka wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::: Bill Baka wrote:
:::
::::: I have only had take advantage of a SAG ride once (rain) and the
::::: van was already crammed to the max. Fitting an electric or bent
::::: in would have been impossible. The SAG guy was more than a little
::::: busy collecting wet and frozen cyclists.
::::: Bill Baka
:::
::: Some 'bents require no more space than your typical bike, even less
::: for some.
:::
:::
:: Are you talking about folding bents?

No, not in particular.

A bent bent? There is one guy
:: in my area who uses a bent and it is definitely about twice as big
:: as any of my bikes. What I remember most is the God awful long
:: second chain from the front pedals and gears to the rear.

Mine has a very long chain...I call it a monster 'bent!

:: I don't think that would bend.
:: Any examples in mind?

There are plenty of SWB bents around that are about the size of a normal
bike or even shorter. The handle bars are about the size of road bike bars
or smaller.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Some have front wheel drive and thus don't have the long chain.

There is a LOT of variation in the 'bent world.

I got mine only because I like the different experience of riding one. I
still ride my road bike, though this winter I've only been on the 'bent
(just getting use to the handling characteristic, since they are different).

:: Bill Baka

02-01-2007, 05:57 AM

On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 08:24:58 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>There are plenty of SWB bents around that are about the size of a normal
>bike or even shorter. The handle bars are about the size of road bike bars
>or smaller.

What you say is true, but as a generality, bents take up more room.
Even the typical SWB takes up more because a diamond frame front end
allows (in general) more flexibility in getting a bike into different
spaces. I've loaded a fair number of bents on racks and in vans and
(in general) they are more difficult than DFs. And, of course, by the
time you get three or so bents, you have a variety that won't
accomodate the others. DFs (in general) have the same essential
configuration and can accomodate each other well, especially when
loading into a van.

That said, I still have a folding Linear recumbent that can fit just
about anywhere. Just make sure you have the front wheel locked into
place before you start out on your ride.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

02-01-2007, 06:58 AM

Curtis L. Russell wrote:
:: On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 08:24:58 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
:: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote:
::
::: There are plenty of SWB bents around that are about the size of a
::: normal bike or even shorter. The handle bars are about the size of
::: road bike bars or smaller.
::
:: What you say is true, but as a generality, bents take up more room.
:: Even the typical SWB takes up more because a diamond frame front end
:: allows (in general) more flexibility in getting a bike into different
:: spaces. I've loaded a fair number of bents on racks and in vans and
:: (in general) they are more difficult than DFs. And, of course, by the
:: time you get three or so bents, you have a variety that won't
:: accomodate the others. DFs (in general) have the same essential
:: configuration and can accomodate each other well, especially when
:: loading into a van.
::

My experience with sags (limited, I admit) is that only a few bikes are in
the "wagon" at time and they generally go between reststops. So, one of
these "small" bents would likely not be a loading problem. It's not as if
you're going to fill a space with as many bikes as you can.

:: That said, I still have a folding Linear recumbent that can fit just
:: about anywhere. Just make sure you have the front wheel locked into
:: place before you start out on your ride.

A folder would be nice. I assume you can fly with it, right? I'd like one
of those....one day!

02-01-2007, 07:46 AM

"Kristian M Zoerhoff" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:eKTvh.57350$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].prodigy. net...
> On 2007-01-31, OldGirl <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>> A couple of clarifications:
>>
>> 1. There is a federal law that states that if a bicycle has an electric
>> motor and is limited to a top speed of 20 mph, it is a considered a
>> bicycle.
>> This preempts the state laws. Some states have a broader definition,
>> some
>> require pedals some don't. But in all 50 states an electric bike limited
>> to
>> 20 mph is a bike.
>
> Can you please cite? This conflicts with (at a minimum) Illinois state
> law, so
> I'm quite naturally curious about it.
>

Public Law 107-319, section 1, 116 Stat. 2776.
The Act defines the term ``low-speed electric bicycle'' as follows:

(b) for purposes of this section, the term ``low-speed electric
bicycle'' means a two- or three-wheeled vehicle with fully operable
pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 h.p.), whose
maximum speed on a paved level surface, when powered solely by such
a motor while ridden by an operator who weighs 170 pounds, is less
than 20 mph.

02-01-2007, 08:14 AM

On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 09:58:46 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>My experience with sags (limited, I admit) is that only a few bikes are in
>the "wagon" at time and they generally go between reststops. So, one of
>these "small" bents would likely not be a loading problem. It's not as if
>you're going to fill a space with as many bikes as you can.

On a few large rides I've filled vans and pickups. However, true, it
isn't a problem - for one thing, you don't have just one sag. Large
multiride events are the most likely times for one van filling up.
where one sag has t cover a hundred riders or more ad does a trailing
sag all the way. Even then you can run back and empty, even though it
will be a while before you catch back up (people that have never done
sag for some reason think that covering a 50 mile loop is almost
instantaneous in a car).

As I mentioned in an earlier post, its not a problem for the sagwagon
even then. The person on the side of the road can be given three
choices, more or less, when the sag is near full - stash your bike and
take this sag back to the start/finish and drive back i nyour own car,
wait for the next sag, or wait and have someone else with the
necessary hardware drive back. If you are sitting on the side of the
road until a sagwagon comes that can load your Double Vision tandem,
you could be there a while. Maybe an empty Greyhound...

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

02-01-2007, 08:43 AM

["Followup-To:" header set to rec.bicycles.misc.]
On 2007-02-01, OldGirl <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
> "Kristian M Zoerhoff" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:eKTvh.57350$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].prodigy. net...
>> On 2007-01-31, OldGirl <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>> A couple of clarifications:
>>>
>>> 1. There is a federal law that states that if a bicycle has an electric
>>> motor and is limited to a top speed of 20 mph, it is a considered a
>>> bicycle.
>>> This preempts the state laws. Some states have a broader definition,
>>> some
>>> require pedals some don't. But in all 50 states an electric bike limited
>>> to
>>> 20 mph is a bike.
>>
>> Can you please cite? This conflicts with (at a minimum) Illinois state
>> law, so
>> I'm quite naturally curious about it.
>>
>
> Public Law 107-319, section 1, 116 Stat. 2776.
> The Act defines the term ``low-speed electric bicycle'' as follows:
>
>
> (b) for purposes of this section, the term ``low-speed electric
> bicycle'' means a two- or three-wheeled vehicle with fully operable
> pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 h.p.), whose
> maximum speed on a paved level surface, when powered solely by such
> a motor while ridden by an operator who weighs 170 pounds, is less
> than 20 mph.

OK, I figured this is what was being referenced. However, this law relates
only to required /equipment/ for motor vehicles; the above definition
(which is, as stated, "for purposes of this section") is restricted in
scope to this arena, and has no bearing on operational regulations or
operator licensing by the states.

In practice, this law prevents states from classifying electric bikes as
motorcycles and forcing the requisite lights and turn signals on them,
but nothing else. Taking Illinois as my example, this is moot, as
electric bikes are classified as mopeds, which have the same equipment
restrictions as bicycles (except that the operator's eyes must be
protected by a clear shield of some kind -- a helmet is sufficient).

I did see a related US law that required bike paths built with federal
funding to allow electric bikes; that one is the more interesting law
to me, as virtually all MUPs around here lately are built with CMAQ
funds.

<http://www.electric-bikes.com/legal.htm> seems to have a decent discussion
of the legal issues involved, though the details are fuzzy (his IL data,
for example, says 25 mph when the law online says 30).

--

__o Kristian Zoerhoff
_'\(,_ [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
(_)/ (_)