Loophole for hybrid class 2/3 ebikes?
Posted by Inciteful_Analysis@reddit | ebikes | View on Reddit | 49 comments
This will drive the "but the law says" crowd nuts. A literal interpretation of California bill 1271 (now law) seems to allow hybrid class 2/3 ebikes if they are dual motor. With one motor throttle-assisted and limited to 20mph and the other motor pedal-assist-only limited to 28mph. Yes, I think you can have your cake and eat it too with a dual motor.
I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Happy Thanksgiving to all those embracing strict interpretation of the law.
*(2) A “class 2 electric bicycle,” or “low-speed throttle-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle, and that is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour.*
*(3) A “class 3 electric bicycle,” or “speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, that is not capable of exclusively propelling the bicycle, except as provided in paragraph (4), and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 28 miles per hour, and equipped with a speedometer.*
jaredthegeek@reddit
A bike cannot be 2 classes at the same time, it would be a class 3.
celeste_ferret@reddit
Class 2 can't have motor assist over 20mph, and class 3 can't have a throttle, making the hybrid thing illegal.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
You aren't being precise. That is not exactly what the law says.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
Show me where California Code says that.
wturber@reddit
It says it right there in paragraph 3. If the bike is equipped as a Class 3, then it is a Class 3. You would have to remove the Class 3 equipment for it to not be a Class 3. Sure, you might choose to not energize the Class 3 gear, but the bike is still so equipped.
What you are trying to say is essentially the same as saying that your Class 3 ebike isn't a Class 3 ebike if you don't turn the battery on.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
It qualifies as both class 2 and class 3. Not one person has cited California Code that prohibits this.
wturber@reddit
Right. It is both Class 2 and Class 3. So if operated in an area where Class 3 is prohibited, you are in violation of the law. No loophole. Simple.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
It could be ridden on the street with throttle and 28mph pedal assist under the strict interpretation put forth. So you are wrong again.
wturber@reddit
I've never seen a Class 1,2 & 3 system mention the use of a "throttle". Note that there is no mention of a "throttle" in the laws you cited. So you haven't even made a point here.
The law only cares if you are pedaling or not when motor power is being applied. So if you are going 28mph on level ground with motor power assist and not pedaling, You are outside of all three classes. If you are pedaling, then you are Class 3 - per the laws you cited.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
Class 2 is explicitly defined as having a throttle.
My dual motor example doesn't provide assist without pedaling above 20mph. You are thrashing to land a point and failing miserably.
placeperson@reddit
The umbrella paragraph to those provisions says
The definition uses the singular term "an electric motor." If it has motorS it is not an electric bicycle
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
No, having at least one motor is a necessary condition. It does not address multiple motors. Thus they are not explicitly prohibited. If the intent were to prohibit multiple motors, it is poorly written legislation.
placeperson@reddit
If the intent was to permit multiple motors it would say
But it doesn't say that
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
No, because your text would not recognize single motor ebikes.
Laws are restrictive, not permissive, in nature. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal system.
placeperson@reddit
Only one of us here is a lawyer....
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
There don't appear to be any good lawyers here.
placeperson@reddit
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't think your reading is impossible, but I don't think it's the one that any court would say carried the day if it was ever tested.
I also think anybody taking your not-legal advice here would need to contend with this section:
Any bike that had been modified (i.e., had an additional motor added to it) and had the resulting total power exceed 750 watts would run afoul of this provision. You'd either need total power to be <750W or have the two-motor setup not be "modified" (presumably, sold like that by the manufacturer)
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
You could definitely argue that the two motors would have to total to less than 750W.
The proposed dual motor bike would not be capable of attaining a speed greater than 20mph on motor alone. So nothing to contend with there.
sanjosethrower@reddit
The lawyer from People For Bikes that I was briefed by in advance of a day of advocacy for bicycle matters in Sacramento disagrees with you. As does the legislative analysis documents from the bill you cite.
But OP likely doesn’t care about this as he dismisses valid reasons for the class system being structured as it is as not valid for “reasons”.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
Cite California Code that disagrees with me. You can find a lawyer on any side of an issue just like an economist. Cite the law that prohibits the dual motor configuration I describe.
wturber@reddit
No law prohibits dual motor configuration. But the bike will be classed based on the most capable system on the bike. That is right there in the plain language of the laws you cited.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
Nowhere is this stipulated. If you see otherwise, please refer me to the exact phrase.
Furthermore, the asinine classification system is ambiguous as to which class is the most capable because class 3 is NOT a superset of class 2.
sanjosethrower@reddit
Maybe if you spent less time saying asinine and more time reading the supporting material for the three class system you could learn the model legislation was not designed to answer the question “which class is the most capable” and just because you want it to doesn’t mean it needs to to be sane policy.
There are states that made multi-class electric bicycles legally a thing. California did not choose to do that. It was considered and rejected.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
You have yet to cite California Code refuting my dual motor hypothesis.
People for Bikes isn't some infallible organization and neither is California. And if either proposes something that puts my safety at risk I damn well will speak out against it.
wturber@reddit
In the law you cited, it says that it is Class 3 if it is equipped as Class 3. At best, you could argue that the bike meets both classes. But so what? if you operate said bike where a Class 3 is not allowed, you have broken the law. You could argue that the bike was Class 2, and you'd be right. But you couldn't successfully argue that the bike isn't a Class 3. So you are still violating the law.
Put simply, nothing in the law says that a bike can't be both classes simultaneously.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
That's exactly what I'm arguing, it meets the definition of both classes. And there is no arbitration clause as to how that should be treated.
wturber@reddit
If a city prohibits the use of Class 3 on it streets and you are riding a bike that is Class 3 and Class 2. You are clearly violating the law because you are operating a Class 3 bike where it is not allowed.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
Dude, stop grasping at straws. Class 2 and class 3 are almost always permitted on streets. And I challenge you to find an ordinance where one class is permitted on the streets but not the other.
sanjosethrower@reddit
The People for Bikes lawyer that briefed me believes dual motor configurations are disallowed by the use of the singular in all references to the motor in the law.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
I've provided in depth sound detail why I believe class 3 should be a superset of class 2 functionality. Save your for "reasons" denial.
wturber@reddit
Actually you didn't. You merely made an assertion and gave your opinion. You didn't make an argument that supported your conclusion.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
My reply was addressed to SanJose to whom I have provided detailed rational in the past on MULTIPLE occasions.
The problem with interjecting yourself in a reply to someone else is that you don't have the full context.
wturber@reddit
I have the full context of this thread and I'm responding to this thread. If your comment was referring to something outside of this thread, then it is on you for not making that clear.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
I'm not responsible for your eagerness to tag team without context.
Freedom_33@reddit
You are here to argue correct, or has this come up and needs to be tested in case law?
It will come down to a bunch of prosecutorial discretion and judicial interpretation, I wouldn’t hold your breath.
See for example Legislative intent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislative_intent
And judicial interpretation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_interpretation
Or a moot point because no standing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)) unless you have such a bike, have been cited, and will to argue it in court
chimpMaster011000000@reddit
So glad I live where police don't even care how powerful my bike is as long as I don't drive it like a dick.
Lebucheron707@reddit
As one Hells Angels dude once put it, “Brother, you DRIVE a car. You RIDE a bike.”
celeste_ferret@reddit
They may not care today, but more and more places are cracking down so you could face possible confiscation and citations for operating an uninsured unlisenced motor vehicle. And if you ever get in an accident, your liability will be huge if you're operating an illegal vehicle.
KatakanaTsu@reddit
Mine isn't technically within the realms of legality as far as the books go, but the police pass me all the time and don't bat an eye because I'm a more responsible driver than most motorists.
One cop even told the city to tune up their traffic light sensors after noticing I was stuck at a red light that wouldn't change.
chimpMaster011000000@reddit
Same lol I was under the assumption that the BBSHD and the BBS02 had the same housing but somebody on here corrected me recently so I really have no easy out. Yeah officers it's 250W over the limit, sorry.
wturber@reddit
Well the motor power watt rating is a whole bag-o-worms of ambiguity. Motors all have a range of power outputs that depend on the electronics and power source that is upstream. And the laws seldom define what they mean by "maximum motor power" in a clear way that would allow objective interpretation. So my take is that if you supply any brushless motor with 900 watts of electrical power or less, you are almost surely within the the limit of 750 watts of power output (motors seldom get much more than 80% efficient - nevermind the electrical losses) and even more surely within the intent of the law.
chimpMaster011000000@reddit
I think it's whatever the nominal power rating is. Which yeah... the BBSHD is toeing the line between ebike and unregistered motorbike at 1kW nominal. Well more like going just over the line haha.
wturber@reddit
But the law doesn't say "nominal rating." It typically says something like "a power output not more than 750 watts." That's why I say the law is ambiguous. And if I went to court and could show that my nominally rated 1000 watt motor can only output 750 watts as installed and configured on my ebike, I would expect to win the argument - at least eventually - because the law does not say "nominal rating" it says "power output."
wturber@reddit
Yeah. I think the basic ebike laws should be focused around speed limits and not power limits. The limit should be 25mph and in that case most cops would likely give you a 5mph grace. Easy peasy.
chimpMaster011000000@reddit
100% agreed and I think a lot of cops feel the same way. They drive right past me pretty frequently.
jaredthegeek@reddit
They don’t care in most of California either. It’s only where the Surron kids are going crazy or people being idiots on beach paths.
ZeppyWeppyBoi@reddit
Sure, you found a loophole. Go ahead and make the bike, and see if you get in trouble, and then take it to court and post back here what happens.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
It's tempting but I have no use for a heavy dual-motor ebike.
Inciteful_Analysis@reddit (OP)
Looks like some people are butthurt about compliance with the letter of the law and downvoting. They are never satisfied.