I agree with this article, which basically says that CA Assembly Bill 1557, which tries to limit the legal amount of power an e-bike can be rated for to a certain wattage number, is well meaning, but misguided. I’m all for clear classification and regulation of e-bikes, but this isn’t it.
There really does need to be a more clear separation between true e-bikes and e-motos. E-bikes get enough controversy on their own; they don’t need the extra ire that e-motos draw.
Wow, how disappointing. Given how popular this program was, it’s sad to see its demise. And the money going instead to a car-centric program is insult to injury.
This is a fun, non-photography related essay from Johnston, well worth your time.
This thing looks really good. But, just as I feared, this video has them riding on trails where Class 3 e-bikes are illegal. We have a hard enough time trying to get trail access for Class 1 e-bikes, and people doing 28 MPH on these things is going to get all e-bikes banned from trails.
This is one of the things I wondered about as I was posting earlier: the weight of the bike. At the better part of 100 pounds, no one can reasonably expect to ride anywhere they’d have to carry it, especially up stairs.
Wow, there are some really neat ideas here. I love the idea of micro-mobility devices like these! I am a bit concerned about the marketing photos that suggest this Class 3 e-bike is suitable for trails, when most trails do not allow above Class 1.
“Block groups that added protected bike lanes saw commuter ridership increases 1.8 times higher than those that added standard bike lanes (SBLs, yes, paint), and 4.3 times higher than those that added no infrastructure at all. […]the clear champion in the data was the protected lane.”
I got a chance to test ride the newly introduced Brompton G Line, and liked it a lot, but ultimately decided to wait until the electric version comes out this fall. Check out the post on my site for more impressions and thoughts about the G Line.