Umm that’s not exactly what they’re saying.
It would update a 27-year-old law to create three new classes of electric bikes based on the type of motor and how fast they can go.
Hell the ACTUAL statute is just defining what a e-bike is. You can see it here: https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2024r1/Measures/Overview/HB4103
It does say class 1 can be operated by anyone, but 2 and 3 can be limited to 16 and older. Yes that’s more restrictive then the past, but really it’s “Defining the e-bikes” because they were poorly defined based on an almost hundred year old law.
That being said it does limit the top speed of an e-bike to 28 miles an hour, I assume above that it’s now a motocycle, and honestly, that might be a good thing, because at that speed they no will come out of no where (hell at 20-30 miles an hour they still will)
This is hardly as bad as the title.
So it’s literally to prevent 9 year olds going 50 on an e-bike. Seems fair to me.
Damn 1997 was 100 years ago? How time flies…
Do they at least require insurance on anything that goes faster than 15 mph or similar?
If only.
Maybe we could get signage that clearly displays a bike’s information such that a hit & run wouldn’t be impossibly easy. Maybe we could make it made of Metal so it’s durable. Call it a License Plate.
As far as I read/understand, nope. But if it does limit the assistance to 28 miles an hour, that might be required if the bike goes above that speed. (Note: that’s only the point where the power would stop assisting, not the fastest speed the bike can do.)
How many people can really control a bike at 28mph?
I have a Class 3 (28mph), it’s actually not too bad. That assumes the brakes are well-maintained, though, and as we know there are no inspections for e-bikes. I’ve seen some terrifyingly bad brakes on normal bicycles, so I can’t imagine what some people’s e-bikes look like.
It should be mandatory for Class 2 and Class 3 e-bikes to have hydraulic disc brakes imo. I have mechanical disc brakes, and I have to tighten them at least once a month. It seems unwise to trust that the average person would also do that. Rim brakes are right out; they have nowhere near enough braking power for the speed and weight of most e-bikes.
So, are you insured in case you run someone over?
Most people that do longer rides would be fine with that. On downhill sections you can hit that easily enough, and there’s wind too. It’s definitely fast, but it’s fine enough. It doesn’t matter what you’re driving or riding, you always drive to the conditions anyways.
Yes, you can easily get that fast, but can you also brake fast and reliably enough, too, so humanity is safe around you?
If you agree that humans can control a car going 75mph, then a bike going 28 isn’t an issue.
Yes, but a car has actually appropriate brakes for the speed they are going at. With bikes, even good brakes are not really up to such speeds.
The braking characteristics are not all that different from a normal bike to an ebike, provided they weren’t deliberately ignored. Ebikes having a lower centre of gravity also helps this. If you want to whine about ebikes going 28m/h, you should also be complaining about 80% of the cyclists out there.
The braking characteristics are not all that different from a normal bike to an ebike
That’s the point. That’s what makes them dangerous.
And: If cyclists only did 28 meters per hour, they would actually be quite safe :-)
I ride a class 3 and 30mph is not that bad. I regularly hit that coming down hills, even on a non-ebike. It does require your attention to be on the road and it would hurt if you wiped out. My fastest ever was 44mph
What is a “class 3”? Is that an American classification?
Its largely by state here in the US, but it is kind of staring to converge on similar guidelines.
In Colorado
Class 1: The electric motor provides assistance only while the rider is pedaling and stops assisting at 20 mph.
Class 2: The electric motor can propel the bike without pedaling, but stops assisting at 20 mph.
Class 3: The electric motor provides assistance only while the rider is pedaling and stops assisting at 28 mph.
All must be less than 750 watts, but it doesn’t specify how that is measured. Also, these rules aren’t reliably enforced.
My city just has a 20mph limit on urban trails and tolerates ebikes that don’t do stupid stuff and ring their bell for peds.
Thanks. How far does it take you to brake down from top speed to standstill?
Honestly the motor should be cutting off well before that speed.
Yes. Way before that.
Some states don’t even require insurance for motorcycles. So there’s that.
I never dienied that some states are terminally stupid. I mean, some states in the US don’t even require regular safety checks for cars.
This doesn’t seem so bad. I live in the PNW and have seen people absolutely hauling ass on home-made e-bikes and scooters, easily 40mph and passing traffic in the bike lane.
I’m not against people building their own e-bikes, but at some point it’s not an e-bike, it’s a motorcycle, and they need to be in traffic and ideally have the brakes to match.
Yeah, imagine using rim brakes at 40 mph. Good luck with the inevitable crash with absolutely nothing to cushion or take the hit for you(no crumple zones).
“It is literally impossible for us not to harvest your data and sell it, so you can’t come in”.
That’s hilarious, so some sites just Apple-gatekeep potential viewers?
As a european, I don’t feel like I’m missing out. If a site has too many ads or popups, I’m inclined to click it away anyways.
Haven’t seen ads it a while, uBlock Origin rocks.
No, it’s sites gatekeeping their dodgy tracking cookie policies.
US companies don’t want to comply with data protection rules of other territories, so they block our access, just so they can continue their exploitative tracking
Eh, often updated privacy laws (a good thing) can lead to an aweful lot of work (and confusion) for developers.
A local news company probably doesnt want to deal with privacy laws that do not effect their target audience (despite those privacy laws being a good thing).
The other option is to be a part of a global news conglomerate that ensures everything is in compliance, but that often leads to some sort of adjenda of what can & cant be published.
Or you pay a platform to host your articles. Which is awesome for anyone that doesnt have devs on staff (or retainer). But you are beholden to that platforms desires
It’s because the EU actually governs the storage and use/sale of personal data. This is the mark of a sketchy company that doesn’t want to comply with basic privacy requirements.
If you’re in the EU and you see this, it’s probably a good thing, and it means even the US viewers shouldn’t be visiting the site. Because the EU laws aren’t even that restrictive or difficult to comply with.
AKA Geotargeting
This honestly makes me furious:
A 15-year-old boy… e-bike
the teen was riding with a passenger on the back.
They were riding … on the sidewalk
The teen who died was not wearing a helmet, police said.
They were riding it on a sidewalk, through a crosswalk and someone turned into them. Of course.
One caveat I’ll say is that depending on how fast they were going the laws should be that they should be with traffic, because if I’m driving and I look right I may not notice someone going 40+ mph on a sidewalk. But even then the law should be “Where do ebikes belong” officially
Someone going 40+ MPH is doing what amounts to riding a small motorcycle down a sidewalk. That’s no longer a “bicycle” thing. Imagine the howling and pearl-clutching we would be reading if someone were caught blasting, say, a Honda Grom down a sidewalk like that. Which is already illegal, for obvious reasons.
I own an ebike and I use it on the mixed use trails in my city. Mostly I have it because I often pull my kids on a trailer bike and we have hills in town.
I fear that my riding on these trails will soon be banned because people are out there driving stupidly fast on big knobby-tired motorcycles masquerading as “e-bikes.”
There are tons of Karens pushing strollers on these trails and any election now they’re going to ban my bike.
Sad, but in a lot of places unenforceable. My city can ban whatever they want, but they don’t have the manpower to wipe after they shit. :D
I hope the Karen’s leave you alone.
Unenforced is a little different than unenforceable.
Society is unfortunately still functioning where I live.
So where exactly do you get the idea that motorcycles, apparently dirt bikes even, get mistaken for ebikes…?
There are lot of such toys on the market. They are electric. But they don’t resemble bikes in any way. I get the idea that they are mistaken for e-bikes when people ride them on our mixed use trails which are clearly marked for pedestrians and bikes only, not motor vehicles. People think anything electric is allowed. They are driving shit the same weight as a 125cc motorcycle in between pedestrians. And guess what? These vehicles go really fast so they are more dangerous than anything else on the trail, and they don’t mix into traffic well. The fools riding them are constantly weaving through passing everyone so they can GO FAST! WANNA GO FAST!
Gotcha. I hate that people will do whatever unsafe bullshit they can get away with. In my city recently we’ve had an epidemic of people buying small gasoline powered scooters that clearly are going over 40mph yet they barely slow down at stop signs. They also run every red light. I can’t step out my door without seeing this happen. They’re acting like they are bicycles and it’s bananas. Then there is also the “I’m going to ride my motorcycle at 50mph in the bike lane” people who I just want to slap. People are the worst.
Years ago I worked at a bike repair camp in Burning Man. We got people’s bikes working again by the hundreds. The occasional dickbag would try to bring his gas powered scooter or whatever in and we’d send them packing. I remember one guy was like “I’ll just borrow your tools and do it myself” and he got thrown out.
Just to be clear, “40+ MPH” is wildly inaccurate to the point of being a strawman argument. If the e-bike the kid was on was any sort of normal – and there’s nothing in either the article about the law or the article about the collision linked from it to indicate otherwise – then it was going no more than 20 MPH, tops.
40mph is probably a bit extreme, but “20mph, tops” is also pretty low
E bike laws, terminology, and manufacturers can be kind of a wild patchwork of nonsensical bullshit but a lot of states recognize, with some degree of regulation or restrictions, what have commonly come to be called class 3 e bikes, that can go up to 28mph, and in my shopping around I’ve seen plenty that advertise that speed or even higher.
There’s a lot of imported e bikes that play fast and loose with the regulations and their quality control, and I’m sure there’s a dedicated bunch of people tinkering with their bikes to make them go faster and remove built-in restrictions, so there’s probably a lot of people zooming around at 30+MPH
The vast majority of e-bikes (other than weird Chinese shit from ebay) are class 2.
Let’s not downplay how fast 20mph is on the sidewalk. When you’re expecting people to be moving at 4mph, 5 times that is ridiculously fast.
Additionally, according to your article, they are capped at 28mph. Which is stupid fast on a sidewalk.
Additionally, according to your article, they are capped at 28mph.
That’s class 3. The vast majority of e-bikes are class 2.
One of the many reasons you don’t ride anything on the sidewalk is that you cross driveways and crosswalks too quickly to be seen by drivers. Even a standard bike should be ridden in the road, because 15 mph is fast enough to “come out of nowhere” and be hit by a car. All bikes are road vehicles.
I always ride on the side walk if there is one. I’d rather get hit by someone backing up at 5mph than someone going down the road at 50mph. And I’m always watching driveways for cars backing up.
I’d rather get hit by someone backing up at 5mph than someone going down the road at 50mph.
-
It’s not about cars backing out of residential driveways; it’s about cars turning onto side streets and it happens at a lot more than 5 MPH.
-
Cyclists being rear-ended (at 50 MPH or otherwise) while riding in the street is much less likely to happen than them being t-boned while riding on the sidewalk. You have to factor the probability into the risk, not just the severity.
it’s about cars turning onto side streets and it happens at a lot more than 5 MPH.
I have mirrors, so I check behind me for cars turning right and I can see oncoming traffic for cars turning left.
You have to factor the probability into the risk, not just the severity
My primary concern is the severity. I feel way less safe riding in the street. All it takes is a semi-truck swerving a few feet, a drunk driver not paying attention, or someone looking at their phone at the wrong moment and it’s game over for me. The stretch of my commute that I have to share the road with cars is the worst part and if I had to do that the whole way I simply wouldn’t cycle anymore.
The real problem is a lack of bike infrastructure, but until that is resolved I’m going to ride where I feel safe and that is as far away from cars as possible. And I’m not on an ebike, just a regular one. I only go 10-15 mph.
-
You are less safe for this. You think otherwise, but you’re wrong. Sidewalk. Side. Walk.
Pavement. Pave. Ment. Ment for paves
I LOLed
Less safe how?
It’s because you’re exactly in their blind spot. If they’re on the street and you’re on the sidewalk next to them. They’ll run you over at the next junction, as it has happened in this case. It’s always right turns and things to the side of cars. And you’ll be exactly there when cycling on the sidewalk.
Additionally car drivers don’t anticipate fast moving things on the sidewalk. They’ll have a quick glance at the sidewalk directly before and after the junction. Because a pedestrian can only move so far in the time until they made the turn. Then they’ll watch out for other traffic on the street, signals and so on. In the meantime you’ll emerge out of nowhere on the pavement, moving at 5x the speed of anything that’s anticipated to be there and that’s going to be a problem.
I don’t know how it’s in the US. But generally you should just cycle in plain sight directly infront of them on the road. It’s difficult to miss that.
When cycling (and driving tbh) I assume everyone’s an idiot and they’re going to hit me until proven otherwise. I don’t cross a street at full speed and assume everyone’s going to see me. I make eye contact and don’t cross unless they see me and start slowing down.
Cycling directly infront of cars seems like the optimal way to generate road rage, impede traffic, and endanger your own life.
As I said I don’t know how driving is in the US. I heard it’s really bad in some places. I know it’s the way we do it here. There is just one road and cars and bicycles need to get along and share it. It’s not always easy, you’re right with that. But the sideway isn’t an option. Pedestrians and bicycles don’t mix well and there regularly are really bad accidents. And the cyclists also get killed by cars there.
There are studies. You end up having a 10x or 20x higer chance to die when cycling on the sideway by being missed by a car driver (I forgot the exact numbers). You can try and mitigate for that by really paying attention yourself, slowing down etc. Keeping track of all the cars around you. I’m not sure if you end up at the same chance to die as if you were cycling on the street. I’d hop off my bike and walk it across the junction if i were on the sideway.
Btw. is it legal to cycle on a sideway where you live?
For the better part of the past 25 years I’ve been bicycling primarily in US cities. The only time I’ve been hit by a car was when I was on the sidewalk. Long story short, I thought we had made eye contact, but I think they didn’t see me because I was moving quicker than a pedestrian would.
I’ve never really felt unsafe, except for maybe in Texas where pickups would cut way too close to me. But I learned to take a whole lane, which is my right, when there were multiple lanes.
In your defense, now I live in a dense suburb and we have a 2 lane 25mph road that is an alternate route if the highway is backedup. I bike on the sidewalk there because some people fly up and down those roads, while others do the speed limit, and I’m afraid I will be missed by people weaving around. Also the sidewalk along that section I use tends to be pretty quiet, when I ride, so I rarely have to deal with pedestrians. But I’m certainly on high alert for the roads and driveways I cross.
Seconded, but not on an ebike. And still use an abundance of caution when crossing the street (I’ll even dismount and walk if I think visibility is low). I try to minimize that by finding a bike path, but you can’t always live next to a bike path.
In NYC, maniacs ride ebikes and mopeds on both the sidewalk and the street as it benefits them. Every time I walk my dog I have to dodge the fuckers going full speed down the sidewalk. And they always glare at the pedestrians like you’re the problem.
In other words, cyclists denied appropriate infrastructure are forced to use infrastructure for other transportation modes inappropriately.
But sure, blame the “maniacs” for having no other choice.
There are bike lanes, people are just assholes. Usually they hop on the sidewalk because they don’t want to wait at a red light.
They also have a choice to follow the rules of the sidewalk they’re hopping on. Y’all are having this cars vs bikes thing and I’m happy for you but now you’re endangering pedestrians by getting onto pedestrian infrastructure without following pedestrian rules.
cyclists denied appropriate infrastructure
Clearly you’ve never been to NYC… There’s bike lanes everywhere.
One caveat I’ll say is that depending on how fast they were going the laws should be that they should be with traffic, because if I’m driving and I look right I may not notice someone going 40+ mph on a sidewalk. But even then the law should be “Where do ebikes belong” officially
40mph is twice as fast as the max (motor assist) speed of a normal class 2 e-bike, but yeah, the real problem here is lack of proper bike infrastructure.
It is trivial to kit-build an e-bike that will do this. Hell, I have one myself, constructed out of a Warp DS2 frame.
But the difference is, I also have an M endorsement and I treat my monster bicycle as a motorcycle. The law doesn’t – that’s actually impossible in my state, so my bike falls in between a registrable motor vehicle and a bicycle. It also has turn signals, a car horn, a headlight, and working brake lights. But I also don’t ride it like a dickhead, and that includes paths set aside for non-fire-breathing bicycles, sidewalks, etc.
My city has amazing bike infrastructure: mixed use trails with no cars, bike lanes on all streets, tunnels and bridges over major thoroughfares (really it’s pretty insanely good and yes it’s in the US of fucking A).
People still ride on the sidewalks like morons. They ride the wrong direction in the bike lanes.
Bike infrastructure is essential but also not totally sufficient. You need a significant enough number of people using them that there is a culture for it and tribal sharing of knowledge around it.
I hate cyclists that masquerade as pedestrians. It’s less safe for them and it’s less safe for everyone. Get your ass out into traffic and learn to take up some space. Ride defensively. Get yourself a rear view mirror. Pick the most bike friendly route. For fucks sake.
I once made a left turn through a gap in the crowd downtown, then out of the ongoing crowd zips out a bike the opposite way out of nowhere. He almost hit the side of my car and of course he got mad at me, even though he was on the sidewalk which is illegal in my city, and he was riding against traffic
I don’t know about Oregon, but I see how people ride their e-bikes here in NYC and it makes me suspect that most e-bike/car collisions are the e-bike’s fault.
I’m from Toronto, same. Also as a pedestrian, those ebikers scare me the way cars scare them. They’re not allowed on the sidewalk in my city, but you’ll be walking with your toddler and an ebike speeds past you on the sidewalk almost hitting you. And they’ll switch between sidewalk and road depending on the traffic, so I have no love for ebikers.
And they’ll switch between sidewalk and road depending on the traffic, so I have no love for ebikers.
This is the problem I have with bikes. They want the pros of pedestrians and vehicles without the cons of either.
There shouldn’t be a con at all. The only “con” is the fact you were conned into believing cars belong in a city.
Blame the city not the biker. An person riding an bike will always choose a protected bike lane over having to weave through pedestrians on the sidewalk. If you want to get mad at someone get mad at the city for not putting down a bike lane instead of the biker just trying to not get hit. Pedestrians and cyclist need to have solidarity to take back the road from there dominance by cars. Fighting between each other over the scraps they give us only helps them, we need to demand more.
No. The city didn’t zip past me and my kids, it was the biker. My city is filled with unused bike lanes as the bikes zip around the sidewalk
Was there a protected bike lane next to you when they zipped passed you? It doesn’t matter if there’s a bunch of unused bike lanes in the city if they aren’t where you need to go. There are tons of sidewalks and car lanes that sit unused most of the time but we keep them open because people will eventually use them.
If we treated bikes like we treat cars and pedestrians and give them they’re own lane on every street none of this would happen, cause bikes don’t want to ride on sidewalks just as much as pedestrians don’t want them on the sidewalks. Weaving through pedestrians slows you down and is dangerous. You may be just as scared of bikes as the bikes are of cars but the cars aren’t nearly as afraid of bikes as bikes are of pedestrians. If your in a car and you hit a bike your going to be fine physically cause your surrounded by a metal box meant to protect you. If your on a bike and hit a pedestrian , you may come out better than the pedestrian, but you are way more likely to be physically injured or dead then if you were a driver. There’s a shared stake in avoiding collisions between pedestrians and cyclist that cars don’t have.
The solution has to be more bike lanes and not less e-bikes because e-bikes are better for the environment and people’s health than cars. Even looking at it as just a pedestrian your better with an e-bike riding in a lane next to you then a car, there less dangerous, quieter, and don’t emit a bunch of toxic fumes and brake pad dust that you have to breathe in. The cars are the enemy, not the e-bikes.
Sidewalks are for people. Where I live you ride on the bike lanes, if there are none, you ride on the road. If it scares you to drive on the road, don’t cycle in the city. Don’t put other people in danger cause you don’t like the rules.
We both agree that bikes on the sidewalk are a problem that needs a solution. Making it illegal to ride on the sidewalk isn’t working so the way I see it there are three other solutions:
- Increase enforcement so that bikers will get consequences for riding on the sidewalk
- Restrict e-bike use
- Add more bike lanes
The first one will cost more than the third and could lead to chases that further endanger pedestrians. Theres also no guarantee it will work as long as there’s gaps in the polices views. This also will discourage e-bike use which gets us to two. Restricting e-bikes could stop them from being in the sidewalk but encourages more car use which is bad for the environment and you as a pedestrian. That leaves three which solves the problem and encourages alternative transport which we need to do if we want to stop climate change.
When there’s a problem with a viable solution you have to find out what system is preventing that solution and direct your anger there. Getting mad at the individual only disperses your anger away from the underlying forces that are making that individual do something that will remain. If you report that cyclist and the police actually do catch them and give them a ticket that’s not going to stop them. Even if they confiscated there bike some day another person’s just going to zip past you.
If your boss fires you in favor of an undocumented immigrant who they can pay under minimum wage, getting mad at the immigrant and having them deported isn’t going to help your problem, your boss will just hire a different one and laugh as they watch the poor people fight each other. You need to have solidarity with that immigrant and realize the boss and the immigration system are harming both of you and direct your combined anger towards them.
I love your typical cyclist answer. “It’s not my fault, it’s not my problem, I don’t care about pedestrians, it’s the city’s fault, the city should spend more money on meeeees!”
Oh no, sensible regulation on e-bikes. Although the initial proposal was better. Splitting the bikes into classifications. And then splitting the eligibility by class (class 1 for any age) and class 2 and 3 for 16 and older.
The accident was horrible but also weird. Biking on the sidewalk? next to a highway?? With turns??? It just reads bizarre and like a traffic system that is very hostile to anything but cars.
Remember that for state governments, “Highway” is a term of art that does not necessarily mean “elevated controlled access high speed multilane thoroughfare with on and off ramps” but usually more along the lines of, “anything paved, but not dirt.” And the cops parrot this to make themselves sound like they’re very officious and totally not useless doughnut-eaters, and then news outlets follow suit.
For example, my state’s laws consistently use the word “highway” to refer to all paved roads that are under the purview of the state (i.e. not private roads, county roads, or municipal roads), even if they’re not wide enough to have a center stripe. Then what we’d think of as a highway I believe is referred to as a “controlled access freeway.”
Here is the location in question. This is definitely a Stroad, and it is certainly not a freeway. Stroads are well known to be hostile to pedestrians and cyclists. It also appears to have non-separated bike lines, i.e. some asshole just came by and painted bike icons on the existing shoulder, calling it job done.
Thanks for that tidbit of background. Much appreciated. The location does seem hostile to anything other than cars… that’s a stroad for you.
All that space can easily fit a protected bikelane and pavement on either side with a row of trees on the separator between the bikelane and the carlane… such a waste.
Obligatory, stroads are stupid.
Jesus, that place looks super dangerous
deleted by creator
anything paved, but not dirt.
Um, isn’t pavement by definition, precisely not-dirt?
Just seems like a weird way of putting it
They’re not actually. They just needed to define what e-bikes are as a by-the-by because so far it had not been defined.
“Well we clearly need to make it even more illegal then” -The Government
(Although technically was 16 year olds not allowed to ride e-bikes? If so then this is more permissive, because it says 16 year olds can ride class 1 bikes)
The bill creates three classifications of electric bicycles. Class 1 ebikes only provide assistance when a rider is actively pedaling and stops its motor when the bike reaches 20 mph. Class 2 ebikes can be propelled without pedaling and top out at 20 mph. And Class 3 ebikes require pedaling, come with a speedometer and top out at 28 mph.
Levy initially proposed allowing anyone, regardless of age, to use a Class 1 electric bicycle and making it a traffic violation for a child younger than 16 to use a Class 2 or Class 3 ebike. But as passed by the House, the bill would ban ebikes for anyone younger than 16 who doesn’t have a driver’s license or permit. Anyone 16 or older can use any ebike.
Hmmm. I think high school is when there might be a real need for an Ebike so I’d go with that age.
What age can you get a driver’s license? Does a learners license count?
A permit is a learner’s license, and it looks like you can get them starting at 15 in Oregon, which is the case in most states.
