Magpies

@Clem Fandango - I feel like some of the bands at ArcTanGent belong in this discussion

@mikeclarke Well, no, "pedelec" is not really that helpful a term because it doesn't actually refer to a 250 W 25 km/h electrically assisted bicycle, it can refer to any electrically assisted bicycle where the power is only supplied when the pedals are being turned. In many jurisdictions, including the UK and EU, the power and speed are legally restricted to the above mentioned figures, but that does not apply everywhere plus it's very easy to buy 500 watt or even 1000 watt pedelecs in the UK, they're just not legal for road use. Pedelec has no legal status as a term in UK law, the correct term for a 250W 25km/h electrically assisted bicycle that requires the pedals to be turned before power is supplied is an EAPC.

At least he sounds like a cyclist and hopefully not just passing through as a step on the greasy pole like the last few.

U ok, hun?

PEDELEC is the correct name for a bicycle powered by human muscles via pedals assisted by an electric motor limited to 250 Watts that cannot exceed 15.5 mph under power. Why do the media insist on labelling these as E-Bikes thus confusing the general public and politicians. Strictly speaking, a pedal-assist bicycle limited to 250W and 25 km/h is a pedelec (pedal electric cycle), whereas a true e-bike can operate via a hand throttle without any pedaling. The media label everything an "E-Bike" for several practical reasons: Linguistic SimplicityShorter and punchier: "E-bike" has two syllables and is easy to say in headlines. Catchall umbrella term: General vocabulary evolves faster than technical or legal definitions. Public recognition: Most consumers already know the phrase "e-bike," making niche terms like pedelec or EPAC less commercially effective for broad communication. Media and Political Impact/Sensationalism: Lumping all motorised cycles together makes it easier to write dramatic stories about speed, weight, or pavement/sidewalk danger. Policy confusion: Politicians react to generalised media terms, sometimes blurring the legal lines between a gentle 250W pedelec and a high-powered throttle bike or a 45 km/h speed pedelec.

@andystow I think that hand beats the house, but I still wouldn't raise the bet. The only way to win is not to play

With all due respect to Adam Hansen, his comments regarding helmets are not helpful at this time. Thankfully it seems to be a minor part in his message to the more significant issue of how rolling road blocks are managed, but I question the inclusion of it in this brief. Measures for race course management may be immediately implementable, but any changes to safety equipment would take R&D, QC, and production time, and all that after the discussion of the minimum efficacy and overall role of helmets can be agreed. A topic infamous for never being resolved to anyone's satisfaction. The Tarling family don't need knee-jerk reactions to already contentious debates distracting from their grief, and the riders in the peloton need effective changes to give assurance that their safety is paramount in the minds of the race organisers. *Edit - I commented here before I caught up on the daily blog, seems the head of EF has similar concerns but in fewer words.

@ChrisA I don't see your point. A Tesla Cybertruck is common way for moneyed inbreds to self-identity in the US but they're illegal to import and register across western Europe. A to-code American suburban family home by UK building regulations is nothing but a glorified garden shed. Legal definitions of acceptable standards differ between different countries, bicycles are no different.

On a bicycle you say...

There's no such thing as an American (as in USA) EAPC. It's a term from EU/UK regulations. In the USA they'd just be Class 1 or Class 2. Legally speaking, if it doesn't fit within the bounds of an EAPC (15.5 mph motor cutout, etc.) then it does count as a motorbike, whether it can move without rider input or not.