Sinclair C5 - time for a comeback ?

[PLD]

More sensibly than the C5, they need to relax the rules on electric bikes. Any reasonably fit bike rider can average about 15mph long term and exceed 30mph short term. So why are electric bikes limited to a top speed of 15mph? Why an age limit on them when a primary school pupil can exceed 15 mph on a normal bike?

An electric bike that could do a steady 30mph would interest many people for commuting and shopping and would be able to keep up with the traffic instead of constantly being in the way of faster moving traffic on roads with little opportunity to pass and subject to the dangers of being passed.

With appropriate Road Tax, Insurance and Driver Testing/Licencing??

[Dorsetmike]

Somebody mentioned Shoemobile, is this the one?

[stevewalker]

More sensibly than the C5, they need to relax the rules on electric bikes. Any reasonably fit bike rider can average about 15mph long term and exceed 30mph short term. So why are electric bikes limited to a top speed of 15mph? Why an age limit on them when a primary school pupil can exceed 15 mph on a normal bike?

An electric bike that could do a steady 30mph would interest many people for commuting and shopping and would be able to keep up with the traffic instead of constantly being in the way of faster moving traffic on roads with little opportunity to pass and subject to the dangers of being passed.

With appropriate Road Tax, Insurance and Driver Testing/Licencing??

I'm all for tax and insurance. However driver testing and licensing for a lightweight electric bike that can only get up to the speed that a schoolchild can get up to on a pedal cycle is perhaps a bit much.

I have thought at times that we should deem everyone older than a year 6 child now to have a cycling licence and give them year by year to year 6 children having had training and passed a test at school (an extended version of Bikeability - the old cycling proficiency test). Much like existing drivers were allowed to keep their licences when the driving test was introduced. At least with licences, there would be something to attach points to and ban people. Although that does maybe get into the problem of identifying cyclists.

[javlinfaw7]

Having been nearly run off the pavememts by ordinary cyclists regularly while walking I woud be worried if any one without training and and some form of testing similar to a CBT  could run a heavier faster machine in a similar manner. I no problems with most cyclists but the minority that race down pavements of think traffic lights  do not apply to them being given access to a vehicle faster than a current moped scares me.

[stevewalker]

I think that if people could keep up with the traffic instead of the constant pressure of a queue behind them or passing vehicles, they'd feel much happier on the road and wouldn't feel the need to be on the pavement.

[RailGooner]

We've missed the boat on licensing umotorized and motor-assisted vehicles. Now that we have umotorized and motor-assisted vehicles readily available to hire on every street corner (certainely the case here in East Oxford,) everyone is a potential driver of such vehicles. So now, everyone would have to be licensed and no government is going to commit to that.

Raising the assisted speed limit of motor-assisted vehicles isn't the answer either IMHO. We've given idiots* the right to drive at 15mph with no physical effort required beyond tapping an app. The thought of those same idiots carelessly whizzing around at 30mph ought to strike fear in every non-idiot.



* I'm not saying all drivers of motor-assisted vehicles are idiots, rather that all idiots have the right to be drivers of motor-assisted vehicles.