Slashdot Mirror


Electric Bikes Won Over China. Is the US Next? (bloomberg.com)

Sales of electric-bike is growing in many parts of the world. Asia-Pacific region, for instance, is estimated to see 32.8M of them sell this year, and 1.6m of e-bikes are expected to be sold in Western Europe by the end of this year. In China, in particular, the ban on motorcyle has lead to massive e-bike adoption. Over the years we've seen many companies such as BG and Pedego dish out models after models, offering bikes ranging from elegant folding versions to flat-tire variants. Despite all the growth elsewhere in the world, North America and Latin America are estimated to see less than 250,000 inventories move this year. But going forward, the number is likely to see a major growth. From a Bloomberg article: Electrics "finally have legs to be able to take off in the U.S.," because cyclists are feeling safer on the roads, battery and motor technology is improving, and retail prices are dropping, says Todd Grant, president of the National Bicycle Dealers Association. However, e-bikes have been banned in some U.S. cities because of safety concerns. [...] The U.S. market could develop "way faster" than Europe's did, says Claus Fleischer, who heads Bosch's e-bike division. The German multinational began selling motors and batteries for electric bikes in 2011 and now supplies more than 60 brands, primarily in Europe. It opened a subsidiary in Irvine, Calif., in 2014 and is sponsoring e-bike expos across the U.S., including one in Portland, Ore., that ran for three days in late May.

271 comments

  1. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    We run those bastards over. Electric bike freaks, same people that steal shopping carts.

    1. Re: No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll run YOU over!!!!

    2. Re:No by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      Car drivers are angry, insufferable assholes who think they are better than everyone else and own the road. Doesn't matter if they are in a Mercedes, a Chevy, or a Smart.

      There, fixed that for you.

  2. "the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by turkeydance · · Score: 3, Insightful

    helped. a lot.

    1. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      Indeed. It's a real stretch to call it "Winning Over" when the other choice is banned.

    2. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Desler · · Score: 1

      But what about the precious inventories that won't be moved?!!

    3. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      plus their preference for two wheelers: (sorry, copy n paste)
      https://ladotbikeblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/10/china-the-kingdom-of-bicyclesshare/

    4. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's two stroke engine bikes then there are still gas options.

    5. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that. The laws limit the speed to 20 mph max for electric. Worthless on flat roads when you can easily reach 25 mph. It prevents them from being used on the roads properly.

    6. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      That's only true in some states. Many states allow higher or have no limit.

    7. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by hawguy · · Score: 2

      Not only that. The laws limit the speed to 20 mph max for electric. Worthless on flat roads when you can easily reach 25 mph. It prevents them from being used on the roads properly.

      Why is a 20mph bike worthless on a road with a 25mph speed limit? I ride my (non-electric) bike on 25 mph roads on my way to work... I rarely go over 20mph yet my bike is still quite useful (and faster than driving since i can take some bike-only shortcuts).

    8. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Informative

      If it's two stroke engine bikes then there are still gas options.

      Motorcycles are NOT banned in China. They are only banned in the core areas of major cities, like Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen, and even there they are allowed if you are a resident and you have the emissions checked. Motorcycles are common in smaller cities and rural areas.

      A major reason e-bikes are popular in China is that you can ride them in the bicycle lanes, which is way safer than riding in traffic. They are not popular everywhere. They work well in flat cities like Shanghai or Beijing, but you rarely see them in hilly cities like Chongqing.

    9. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by hawguy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tell that to the stack of traffic behind you, ass-hat.

      The only traffic behind me in the bike lane is other bikes. If a car chooses to drive in the bike lane, he should drive at bike speed.

    10. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not only that. The laws limit the speed to 20 mph max for electric. Worthless on flat roads when you can easily reach 25 mph. It prevents them from being used on the roads properly.

      No surprise, but cow-herd misrepresents the laws. In my State the cutoff is 15mph, not 20, but that isn't a speed limit of any sort.

      That is merely the speed where it becomes a moped or scooter instead of a "bicycle." So if your device can go over that speed, then it is type of light motorcycle rather than a bicycle, and can't be used on bicycle-only paths. The funny part is that your complaint is that the rule interferes with being able to use electric bikes on roads; no, that is exactly the solution those rules explain to you: if you want it fast enough to be useful on most roads, then you'll have to drive it... on the road.

      Also, it has nothing to do with electric; in most states it applies to any power-assisted bicycle, regardless of technology used. And before these laws were written, all power assisted bicycles were mopeds, a type of light motorcycle! These laws were added specifically to allow those devices which operate at a low (device-limited) speed to operate without licensing and on bike paths.

    11. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > They work well in flat cities like Shanghai or Beijing, but you rarely see them in hilly cities like Chongqing.

      Why so? I had the opposite idea: that e-bikes would help users to negotiate hills and slopes, where a normal bike would be useless. What's the problem?

    12. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 4, Funny

      Another self-entitled cyclist who believes that cars shouldn't be in the bike lane, eh? What next you selfish person? Are you going to disallow cars from driving on the sidewalk also?

      /s

      (The article below indicates that NYPD was not going to take action against a driver who did just that, mowed down a pedestrian, and drove away, however the driver has turned herself in.)

      http://www.streetsblog.org/2016/06/03/driver-who-injured-woman-on-manhattan-sidewalk-pleads-to-two-felonies/

    13. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid lao wai. They ride them everywhere! All over the sidewalk, on roads, between car lanes, just about everywhere EXCEPT the bike lanes. If you see an actual motorcycle in a major city, it is illegal. They just don't give a fuck because 999 times out of 1,000 the cops don't do shit about them.

    14. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by hey! · · Score: 1

      Not quite correct. The law doesn't limit the speed of an electric bicycle; it limits the speed of an electric bicycle that doesn't have the same licensing, registration and insurance requirements as a motorcycle.

      In the continuum between non-electric bike and electric motorcycle which happens to have pedals (like this one) there's no sharp dividing line. No matter what speed capability below which you decide not to regulate an e-bike as a motor vehicle, it will always be convenient sometimes to go a little faster.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    15. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by AK+Marc · · Score: 0

      I've had a friend ticketed for going 60 in a 55, and for riding a bike on a highway (at the same time, so one ticket for being too fast, and one for being too slow). Drafting and hills allows someone to achieve high speeds on a bike. What happens in Belgium is that motorized bikes are allowed on the bike paths. So mopeds, small motorcycles, and electric bikes share the same paths with pedal-bikes. Works fine, and gets more people off the roads.

      In the US, there's such a Trump factor in drivers that they'll vote in measures to hurt cyclists because they perceive an unfair advantage, when helping cyclists would get more people off the roads. Hatred of a class of citizens (cyclists) causes people to vote against their own self interest. Because of all the hateful people, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump wins.

    16. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 20 mph limit is worthless to me since I ride faster than that on flat, level roads. The motor shuts of once I hit 20 mph and the motor and battery becomes extra weight that I have to push. The law in my state makes electric bicycles worthless except for the weaker, slower riders. It's a stupid law that limits proper adoption. Many of the bicycles also just don't have the power to maintain even 10mph when going uphill and there are plenty of hills in my area. I can almost ride that fast on my own already. I've tried one before and basically just went back to a normal bicycle that I can more easily carry up the stairs.

      The only reason I'd want one is to not sweat when I use it to commute to work, but they're not powerful enough for that. This is the reason most electric bicycles are pretty worthless in my area. They're woefully underpowered. The only reason for the artificial legal limit in my state is to promote driving and limit adoption. There are people that have custom e-bikes that exceed the 20mph and maximum legal power levels, but I don't want to end up with my e-bike getting confiscated by the cops when someone complains about it. I don't have that kind of money to waste.

    17. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by greenfruitsalad · · Score: 1

      it would be wise to say those speeds are in km/h. also, where are these belgian hills you speak of?

      my only experience with cycling in Belgium was going from Bruges, BE to Sluis, NL. the guy who rented us bikes said it was just round the corner. i still have nightmares about that bicycle seat and the 2x 30km journey i spent on it. as Homer Simpson would say: "Stupid Flanders." (european joke)

    18. Re: "the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed... E-bikes have made awesome inroads in solving one of Norway's biggest problems ever. Thanks to e-bikes, we have suffered far less from people in spandex mounting their asses within a meter or less of windshields. As a result, intestinal disorders are on the decrease for the first time since Lance Armstrong cursed us.

    19. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      So mopeds, small motorcycles, and electric bikes share the same paths with pedal-bikes.

      I wish they would. Most of the fuckers are on the footpath.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    20. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      That incident was in mph in the US. No need to specify units, the point is the same whether the speeds were 60 in a 55 or 100 in a 90.

    21. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Are they allowed? The places I've been in Europe with full bike paths, also had footpaths parallel. There'd be no reason to use the footpath.

    22. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      Another reason is that the licensing fees for cars are extremely high, which adds on to the cost of the car itself.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    23. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > That incident was in mph in the US. No need to specify units, the point is the same whether the speeds were 60 in a 55 or 100 in a 90.

      It seems both of you are talking about different events.

      But I'd like to say units in this case make a lot of difference. Some guy above said 20 mph was not enough for him. He's probably an athlete and bycicle lanes are not for racing. Even if limits were higher, he would still need to respect elder citizens or cause an accident with someone who'd be slower.

      Anyway, 32 km/h (about 20 mph) is very satisfactory for cruising, even for a biker in prime condition.

      If you live in a country city, cars probably will be faster -- where I live, city streets get so clogged in the rush hour that we see people on foot moving faster than the traffic.

      A bike at 12 mph would be faster than cars!

    24. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Why so? I had the opposite idea: that e-bikes would help users to negotiate hills and slopes, where a normal bike would be useless. What's the problem?

      The biggest problem is that cheap e-bikes are shit. Even the expensive ones regularly burn out if you really subject them to serious hills. I know a guy who lived at a local hot springs before it burned to shit in the valley fire and he was getting e-bikes from a variety of manufacturers to test because of his environment. He killed about a half-dozen of them before he gave up.

      This guy massed maybe 2/3 of me if that, and he killed a half-dozen of the most expensive e-bikes around. I shudder to think of the cheap ones. They might blow up and remove your nutsack.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    25. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      And before these laws were written, all power assisted bicycles were mopeds, a type of light motorcycle!

      What? Who told you that? Power-assisted bicycles substantially predate mopeds. A quick google would show you that they go way, way back. Indeed, the first motorcycles look like nothing so much as slightly more sturdy bicycles.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    26. Re: "the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At, least, the motorcycle. Pays for its roadway, on a continuing basis. The same with autos and trucks. You are just freeloading on their system. But, I am glad to see bigger motors, and better batteries on bikes. Now if they could scavage some of the output for proper lighting. Bikers want the drivers to notice them? How about following the same rules as automotive systems. Be awake, get out your gopro and ride past it, are you easily seen? Or is your bike disable? Even orange is invisible into the sun, wear black, thats invisible in shades, no lights? Then you are invisible most of the time. Day or night, remember how hard it is to see a motorcycle, a bike is even smaller, most motorcycles project the noise to the front now, but an electric bike?

    27. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by longk · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, the cities that aggressively banned motorcycles are also increasingly restricting and/or banning e-bikes. Apparently their stealthiness makes them ideal for robbers snatching your bag or phone and disappearing quickly. They're also just as annoying and dangerous as motorcycles when it comes to driver behaviour and mixing with other traffic.

      Summarised: their lower impact on the environment doesn't make them good citizens.

    28. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by I75BJC · · Score: 1

      And all the Governments will begin adding licensing, inspections, and fees to these eBikes. The Federal/State/Local Government will tax these eBikes out of existence.

    29. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by I75BJC · · Score: 1

      In my area, the bicyclists (on a bike) take up the full lane. Due to the prevalence of no passing zones and curves, hills, restricted sight roads. They growing a line of motors (in motor cars) behind them and slow the entire travel process down. There are few bike lane in our area. Where these bike lanes are located makes them ineffective. On a note of your personal comment that started this, Why didn't you say that you were riding in a bike lane? In fact, by your use of the word, "road", you led most readers to assume conditions they are used to. It appears that you make be creating a situation to make your self look "good" or "smart" or anything but an "asshat"". IMHTPO, you didn't succeed and do actually look like an "asshat". Simple advice: Grow Up!

    30. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Reziac · · Score: 1

      By that standard, what the hell was my old 10-speed? it could easily do better than 50mph on a downhill stretch. (Considering I was keeping up with cars in a 55mph zone...)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    31. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by AK+Marc · · Score: 1
      The average speed of a car in London is less than the average speed of an unimpeded walker.

      The studies also show that you can't reduce the number of cars on a road. You can charge them more, but they don't go away. The only proven way to reduce cars is slow them down. When you average speed gets below a brisk walk, people start walking.

      The problem with transportation systems is that those running it fight to make cars travel faster, and don't focus on alternatives. If people had alternatives they like, they'd take them. Most people won't take the bus. They are slow, noxious, and full of unknown people. Trains are better. They are less noxious, and faster. When I was in DC, I found that almost nobody would take a bus to a train, then a bus to the final destination. That would be "quicker" for many routes, but people would instead choose to bus the whole way, if it reduced transfers.

      But I'd like to say units in this case make a lot of difference. Some guy above said 20 mph was not enough for him. He's probably an athlete and bicycle lanes are not for racing.

      Nope. Being in a place with hills, 20 mph is way too low. Yesterday I was in the car, going 50k in a 50k zone. Was passed by a (looked like) 12 year old on a 20" bike. Of course this was down a steep-ish hill. With hills, you go 10k up and 40k+ down. A slow speed limit will force you to touch your brakes on the way down, and that's a lot of wasted energy on a human-powered bike. 20mph would be fine for a flat country for commuting, and putting around, but insufficient if the desire is for people training on bikes to stay off the roads. 20mph is not a bad average speed, but averages aren't followed in practice, unless the roads are flat, and they aren't flat in most places.

    32. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Dragon+Bait · · Score: 1

      They work well in flat cities like Shanghai or Beijing, but you rarely see them in hilly cities like Chongqing.

      Thank you. I've been wondering about getting one. Problem solved.

    33. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a difference. With the scooter, you don't have to pedal at all, with the electric bike you have, the motor alone is neither strong enough nor configured to power the bike, it merely boost the cyclist. So you can't just hop on and arrive without doing any work, it just kind of takes the edge of any hills etc, which is nice enough.

    34. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by ukoda · · Score: 1

      Try China where they will ride them anywhere and I mean anywhere they can physically ride to and feel they have the need. I often saw them being ridden in shopping malls. This also included motorcycles. But then again I saw small trucks using a pedestrian tunnel under a motorway. Driving and riding in a country with no apparent enforcement of even the most basic rules was both liberating and scary at the same time.

    35. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Perhaps those hills run the battery down faster (and the stated range is rather low to begin with). Then the dead weight of the battery is not a problem on the flat but it is uphill, even more so if the weight is on the back.
      Perhaps there are less cyclists in the first place.

    36. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So all those motorbikes with number-plates are all fake home-made ones, just to blend in with the cars right?
      You are a complete idiot.

    37. Re:"the ban on motorcyle (s?) " by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You seem to be missing the fact that there are two boolean variables involved: "has a motor" and "motor is speed limited to less than n."

      So to answer your question, by that standard it doesn't matter what speed you were going; you presumably didn't have a motor on your old 10-speed. And there is no law against riding a power-assisted bicycle above n mph, the law is that unless the motor is appropriately speed-limited you need a moped license and have to have the vehicle registered as a moped. Mopeds that have pedals can even be ridden legally on bicycle paths if the motor is turned off. And bicycles with speed-limited motors can be ridden above n mph even on bike paths, since most of that speed would be being produced by the human.

  3. E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    John Forester's cult of Vehicular Cycling. Cycling in the US has been crippled for decades by a delusional group of ideologues who believe bicycles belong in the middle of regular motor vehicle lanes, even on 50mph state highways, and who will actively seek to prevent dedicated bicycle facilities from being built if it means people will ride in ways they disapprove of.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    1. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by kheldan · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Should there be more bicycle-oriented infrastructure? Yes.
      However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you, that would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    2. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've always wondered why we'd rather have cyclist hit by cement trucks than pedestrians hit by cyclists..

    3. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      wackos aside, electric bicycles are considered mopeds or motorcycles in many jurisdictions in the u.s.... and along with that, licensing, insurance, age restrictions, and stricter rules on where you can and can't ride.. so that's the reason why they won't be 'taking over' the u.s. any time soon..

    4. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by jareth-0205 · · Score: 1

      However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you,

      Pretty sure nobody is saying anything of the sort. Well, no cyclists would, anyway.

    5. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because cyclists are usually smug poseurs?

    6. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because some fag on a bike getting creamed, literally, is far more entertaining than two people getting ouchies when then fall all over each other on the sidewalk.

      Now who wants some soylent pate?

      captcha: wasted

    7. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      cyclists are already banned from certain roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, even in california.

    8. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Should there be more bicycle-oriented infrastructure? Yes.
      However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you, that would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.

      I've been an active cycling advocate for over 20 years in several different states, regularly attending community meetings to promote cycling, and have never heard of an advocacy group that would reject dedicated cycling infrastructure because they think cyclists belong on the roads. (though I have seen some poor "dedicated" lanes rejected because they were more dangerous than shared lanes since the cyclists were exposed to cars at every intersection).

      More commonly, safe cycling infrastructure is dismissed because it's too expensive (and often that's because it wasn't taken into account in the initial project design -- for example, adding a dedicated bike/pedestrian lane on a new bridge is a tiny portion of the bridge's cost if done during design, but is prohibitively expensive afterwards)

    9. Re: E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's because they want the perks of being a vehicle and a pedestiran. Jerks.

    10. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      cyclists are already banned from certain roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, even in california.

      Where? There are very few roads where this applies.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    11. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 2

      John Forester's cult of Vehicular Cycling. Cycling in the US has been crippled for decades by a delusional group of ideologues who believe bicycles belong in the middle of regular motor vehicle lanes, even on 50mph state highways, and who will actively seek to prevent dedicated bicycle facilities from being built if it means people will ride in ways they disapprove of.

      I doubt if they've been influential enough to cripple cycling. They seem to be confined to online ranting in their own little echo chamber. Thankfully.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    12. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, cyclists are banned from some freeways. (FWIW, low-power motorcycles are banned from even more roads.)

      Do you have anything else?

    13. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      (though I have seen some poor "dedicated" lanes rejected because they were more dangerous than shared lanes since the cyclists were exposed to cars at every intersection)

      So... the shared lanes don't expose cyclists to cars at every intersection (and all points in between as well)? How does that work?

      Where I live we spend a million bucks a mile for bike lanes which are ignored by at least half the cyclists on the road who insist on "sharing" lanes with vehicles lawfully travelling at three times their speed or more. I've seen them riding three or four wide taking up both available motor vehicle lanes in one direction and not a single bike in the adjacent bike lane. Intersections? Red Lights? 4-way stops? Means nothing to our cyclists, they routinely blow right through them. Then there's the Lance Armstrong wannabees all decked out in gaudy spandex who think it's a great idea to "share" a nearby 9-mile narrow stretch of 2-lane shoulder-less ditch-abutting-the-white-stripe no-passing-zone road consisting of nothing but roller-coaster hills. While they may enjoy the challenge, it's insanely dangerous for the cyclists and motorists as well. While it's technically illegal to pass a bicycle anywhere along this stretch of double-yellow-line road, nobody wants to follow one all the way to the end because they're going at most 5 mph up the hills. But then they speed up to the 35 mph speed limit or more going down the hills, making it difficult to pass where there's maybe just enough visibility to the crest of the next hill to pass without killing anyone. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people pass cyclists going UP one of these hills as a result, and I've witnessed many near-misses as another vehicle crests the hill in the oncoming lane as the passing vehicle swerves sharply over to avoid a head-on. NOT ONCE have I seen a cyclist pull off at one of the many driveways along this road to let motor vehicle traffic pass safely.

      Speaking to "an active cycling advocate for over 20 years", here's hoping you've been advocating that your fellow cyclists share RESPONSIBILITY at least as much as you've been advocating the rest of us to share the road. Because we DEFINITELY need more cycling enthusiasts to do so.

    14. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      a...group...who believe bicycles belong in the middle of regular motor vehicle lanes

      Actually, what vehicular cyclists really believe is that bicyclists should act "as drivers of vehicles." Did you know that slow-moving vehicles are already required to be driven as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb? A bicycle is (usually) a slow-moving vehicle, so why should it be treated differently under the law than other slow-moving vehicles?

      Sometimes it's safer to ride in the middle of the lane, such as when the bike lane is full of debris, or there's no bike lane, and the regular traffic lane is too narrow to share side by side with a vehicle. Riding in the center of the lane makes the bicyclist more visible and forces motorists to change lanes to pass instead of passing unsafely close to the bicyclist.

      Yes, passing and the use of the turn signal have become a lost art among motorists. This is why self-driving cars can't arrive soon enough.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    15. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      The standard is that cyclists are permitted on the freeway if it is the only way to get through. This typically means rural interstates.

    16. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (though I have seen some poor "dedicated" lanes rejected because they were more dangerous than shared lanes since the cyclists were exposed to cars at every intersection)

      So... the shared lanes don't expose cyclists to cars at every intersection (and all points in between as well)? How does that work?

      It works because on a shared lane, car drivers (especially truck drivers, especially truck drivers taking a right turn) see cyclists before it's too late.

    17. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      who will actively seek to prevent dedicated bicycle facilities from being built if it means people will ride in ways they disapprove of.

      This is intentionally misleading. Nobody proposing to ban bicycles from traffic lanes is actually proposing to spend the money to replace that access with dedicated lanes. No, telling cyclists to stay in the park is not the same as building "dedicated facilities" in the context of traffic.

    18. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you,

      Pretty sure nobody is saying anything of the sort. Well, no cyclists would, anyway.

      They're certainly saying it, not cyclists but people involved in that debate. The reason it sounds like something nobody would say is because it isn't a popular idea. ;) Probably less than 1% of people supporting any sort of ban actually support replacing all of the access they would be removing. Pretty much all the people talking about it are intentionally misleading in how they present the issue, because if people understand what they actually mean they'll get laughed at. What they really mean is, bicycles are just toys, not transportation, and transportation plans don't need to seriously include them.

    19. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You fell for the misleading claims, though. They're not talking about replacing anything, they're just phrasing their ban proposal in a way that would imply it. So that they sound reasonable.

      When he says:

      delusional group of ideologues... who will actively seek to prevent dedicated bicycle facilities from being built if it means people will ride in ways they disapprove of

      What he means by "dedicated bicycle facilities" is a park. Where you're allowed to ride your toy. Of course, they blame "vehicular cyclists" but that isn't who is trying to popularize the idea; it is anti-bicyclists who are pointing at fringe nutcases to try to paint bicyclists in general as insane impediments to road traffic.

    20. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      I'm in a State where the rules are very friendly to electric bikes, and they worked with the manufacturers to make sure that most of the reasonable electric bikes are still considered bikes. Lots and lots of stores opened up trying to sell them. Most of them also already went out of business.

      The reason is that they had the idea that they could sell really expensive ones to yuppies. But most of the market is working class commuters. So home-built ones are more common than the crazy-expensive ones.

      Another problem with the idea of an expensive electric bicycle is that they're too easily stolen. People who ride a lot and have a fancy bike... also have a cheaper bike to use when they're going to have to lock it up outside somewhere.

      China has much lower battery prices than the US, so they have products targeted at the working class.

    21. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      In Florida, at least, unless you're a 5+bhp cyclist, you're banned from basically all limited access highways. That's just under 4KW, so it takes a LOT of electric motor to get legal on the freeway.

    22. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      John Forester's cult of Vehicular Cycling. Cycling in the US has been crippled for decades by a delusional group of ideologues who believe bicycles belong in the middle of regular motor vehicle lanes, even on 50mph state highways, and who will actively seek to prevent dedicated bicycle facilities from being built if it means people will ride in ways they disapprove of.

      Cyclists have been doing this for years in Australia. Highways are some of the best roads to cycle on.

      The problem with cycling infrastructure is it will only ever cover a small percentage of the roads. And often this bicycling infrastructure includes shared cycle/pedestrian paths which are stupid. Most of the time you are forced back to the road anyway.

    23. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by hey! · · Score: 0

      Just so -- quality matters. "Infrastructure" that makes it more dangerous and inconvenient to cycle is worse than useless. I wonder to what degree the Dunning-Kruger effect plays a role in people proposing bad cycling infrastructure. Everyone who learned to ride a bike as a kid probably thinks he's a qualified traffic engineer where bike are concerned.

      Sometimes when planners talk about "bike paths" they're really talking about mixed use, pedestrian-dominated recreational infrastructure that can secondarily be used for light traffic by occasional cyclists who freewheel along at 5-7 mph. They've got no place to go, so they can take their time weaving in between the selfie-takers, double-wide strollers and kids chalking pictures on the pavement. And the thing is, I'm not against those kinds of mixed-use linear parks. I'm just against counting them as transportation infrastructure.

      I've seen mixed pedestrian-cyclist trails work for bike travel, but it seems to depend on (a) having a relatively small number of pedestrians or (b) having a critical mass of cyclists so that pedestrians naturally organize themselves around the fact that there's heavy bike traffic. You can see the critical mass effect on the Brooklyn Bridge. The bridge is of course nearly always has heavy pedestrian traffic, but the continual stream of cyclists makes it manageable as a bike route (despite the obvious tourists taking pictures).

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    24. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 0

      It's not intentionally misleading in the slightest, you're just throwing that out before going off on a red herring. Vehicular cyclists would rather shut down and stonewall the construction of dedicated cycling facilities than see cycling go mainstream instead of staying their little kamikaze cult.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    25. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 2

      Actually, what vehicular cyclists really believe in their own words is that cyclists should "take the lane". Start to finish that's their nigh-religious mantra, "take the lane" and all will be solved.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    26. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 2

      Found the vehicular cyclist.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    27. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      cyclists should be banned from roads

      You guys realise when you keep using the exact same red herring that nobody mentioned, down to the wording, it's a giveaway that you're actually just trying to dissemble in favor of your utterly failed ideology, right?

      hat would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.

      What's ruined cycling for everyone in the US is the kamikaze cult that thinks bicycles belong only in ordinary motor vehicle roads and will lie, cheat, and protest to keep it that way. In every location where cycling has a significant modal share it's due to the construction of dedicated cycling facilities. There's a reason the rest of the cycling world looks at the US like a bunch of lunatics.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    28. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1, Troll

      Yep take the lane, because if you're kind enough to share it, you'll get killed by some entitled idiot like you who disapproves and would rather risk killing the cyclist by squeezing by than having a bit of patience and waiting.

      Take the lane does solve most problems because the the chance of getting intentionally murdered is much, much, much lower than the chance of getting hit by someone being stupid. Taking the lane leaves (literally) less room for stupidity.

      PS the road isn't yours, stop acting like it is.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    29. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      From wikipedia:

      A vehicular cyclist is a cyclist who generally travels within the roadway in accordance with the basic vehicular rules of the road that are shared by all drivers and adhering to traffic controls.[a] Vehicular cyclists, Forester advises, should feel and act like vehicle drivers, albeit the drivers of narrow and relatively low-powered vehicles

      Vehicular cyclists would rather shut down and stonewall the construction of dedicated cycling facilities than see cycling go mainstream

      Sounds like I'm a vehicular cyclist then. So, you're full os shit and stop making up lies about what I say.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    30. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Nyh · · Score: 1

      E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: the car lobby will make sure wide spread adoption will not be possible. They will introduce 'safety' laws to 'protect' E-bike riders from those 'dangerous' speeds up to 20 mph. You will need to wear a helmet, pass an exam (and will be re-examinated verey year if possible), pay taxes and a liability insurance for when a car crashes into you^H^H^H^H^H^H^H you crash into a car.

      Donald Trump will declare riding a E-bike is un-American, wasn't invented here, and will forbid them when hes is president.

    31. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Riding in the center of the lane makes the bicyclist more visible and forces motorists to change lanes to pass instead of passing unsafely close to the bicyclist.

      In California, when you do that, you are now breaking the law. The law requires all drivers to pull over to permit passing for just one vehicle now, and you are required to pull over when it is safe. The standard used to be five vehicles stacked up behind you. A cyclist can pull over safely basically anywhere, so the short story is that you should pull over immediately rather than holding up faster traffic. That's the same standard for everyone, not just bicycles. The standard is not "when you come to a turnout" but when it is safe. So.... one side, peck! When you manage to not disturb the flow of traffic, then you can use the whole road.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    32. Re: E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they are called freeways.

    33. Re: E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't always blame the motorist, the bikers do stupid stuff themselves, like pulling up beside the car, passing on the right on a single lane, not watching the conditions, no insurance. Not being seen!

    34. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by scamper_22 · · Score: 1

      I don't get it either. I know it is illegal, but I still mainly bicycle on the sidewalk (in Canada). I'll go on the road if it is a quiet street, but in general the sidewalk is the best.

      Are there possibilities of hitting pedestrians? Probably. When walking, I once had a cyclist bump into my rear end, but not much damage. I can definitely see it though, but a bicycle is simply not a car. Collisions like that are simply not that dangerous. You have to be aware you're driving on the sidewalk.

      The other issue that I've heard mentioned is cyclist on the sidewalk are harder to see when cars are backing out of the drive way. That's probably true. I tend to be a little more careful, but again... this would be a relatively low-speed collision. I'll take the risk.

      Dedicated bike lanes? Yeah I'll use them, but I prefer them to be next to the side walk instead of a section of the road.

      Of course this is a matter of preference. If you're a awesome cyclist can pull of 40 kph on the road and don't want to deal with the side walk. More power to you. I'm sure there are law sticklers out there, but in general, the world continues. Those who want to ride on the sidewalk too. Those who want to ride on the road do too. Unless you're being nuisance, the police largely leave it alone.

    35. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are reading the wrong part of the vehicle code. This isthe section that applies, and note all the exceptions. For example, if there is more than one lane going same direction, the cyclist can take the lane. If there are places where right turns are permitted (even driveways), cyclist can move out into the traffic lane. If the road is too narrow for a car to safely pass (and the "3 ft law" applies), the cyclist can be out in the traffic lane.

      ARTICLE 4. Operation of Bicycles [21200 - 21213] ( Article 4 added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 479. )
        21202.
        (a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:
      (1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
      (2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
      (3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a “substandard width lane” is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
      (4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
      (b) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway of a highway, which highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of that roadway as practicable.
      (Amended by Stats. 1996, Ch. 674, Sec. 4. Effective January 1, 1997.)

    36. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You are reading the wrong part of the vehicle code.

      Uh no

      This isthe section that applies,

      No, not it is not. Sadly, it seems we are both wrong; I had read in multiple sources that they had changed it to one vehicle, but it's still five; also, it only applies to highways, although that comes up surprisingly frequently in California, in fact it's the place where I see cyclists shirk the law most frequently. We have a lot of highways. Nevertheless, here is the applicable section:

      On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, any vehicle proceeding upon the highway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time, behind which five or more vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the roadway at the nearest place designated as a turnout by signs erected by the authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the vehicles following it to proceed.

      Note wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, which for a bicycle is almost anywhere. Yet they are constantly clogging North 1, or any of the little highways around the Napa area, and holding up whole long lines of cars.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    37. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      What's ruined cycling for everyone in the US is the kamikaze cult that thinks bicycles belong only in ordinary motor vehicle roads and will lie, cheat, and protest to keep it that way. In every location where cycling has a significant modal share it's due to the construction of dedicated cycling facilities. There's a reason the rest of the cycling world looks at the US like a bunch of lunatics.

      That is not the reason. Most roads in the most bicycle friendly countries on earth do not have bicycle lanes. For the most part the bicycles share space with vehicles. The cities are however much better and designed (or naturally grown), and roads better thought out and not as wide due to the better city design, so bicycles in the side of the road is rarely a problem. I have however visited the US, and in most of the cities I have seen, I would not want to be cyclist in the side of a US road. The US needs bicycle lanes much more than most European countries.

    38. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cyclists are already banned from certain roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, even in california.

      Where? There are very few roads where this applies.

      We call them "Freeways"

    39. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      Why am I not surprised you're as backwards and ignorant about cycling as you are about social issues.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    40. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      I literally started this out linking to hard proof that's crap. I've been to cycle friendly cities like Helsinki, they do NOT share space with vehicles.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    41. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      Most of the dedicated bicycle facilities in the US are poorly designed and poorly maintained. That is why the cycling advocates reject them. Among the common problems:

      Lack of seasonal maintenance. Want to ride in the winter? Sorry, the snow and ice don't get cleared. Want to ride in the fall? Sorry, the leaves don't get removed. Want to ride in the spring? Sorry, it will be months before the frost heaves get repaired.

      Poor or non-existent lighting. Want to ride at night? Sorry, not possible unless you're happy with the idea of riding in the dark.

      Car-centric traffic controls. Typically a rider in the dedicated lane in a city has to stop at EVERY intersection. The bike path may have stop signs at each one, and even if it doesn't the cars can't see you approach the intersection and so you can't proceed safely without stopping. That makes cycling MUCH slower and much more of an effort than it should be - you waste lots of kinetic energy on all those stops. I will believe that some city or town takes cycling seriously the first time I see such an intersection... and the CARS get the stop signs.

      Build a bike path that actually provides a quality experience for everyday cyclists year round and they will use it. Build a bike path that is substandard in one of the ways I cited (or possibly others) and cyclists will complain that you spent money on something that is useless to them rather than on something that would help. Most of the bike paths in the US are things that might be fun for recreational riders, but are useless or worse to people who actually use a bicycle as a form of transportation. A narrow bike path that has a mix of low speed recreational riders (and especially children because they tend not to stay in a predictable path) and faster transportation cyclists is far more dangerous for the transportation cyclist than a street is.

      I'm in partial agreement about the high speed highway. But if you want to build a separate path there, be prepared to give it equal treatment. It must be plowed and cleaned, and the surface has to be maintained at the same level of quality as the car road. The ones that get built in the US, with rare exceptions, just don't meet that standard.

    42. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Note wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, which for a bicycle is almost anywhere.

      Not right here, but yes, almost anywhere else.

      It's unfortunate that the road wasn't designed well for everyone who might want to use it. Planners in the USA are laughably bad at their profession.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    43. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It's unfortunate that the road wasn't designed well for everyone who might want to use it. Planners in the USA are laughably bad at their profession.

      I don't know that it's the planners' fault. They could have the best of intentions and be told to do it wrong to save money...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    44. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by randallman · · Score: 1

      "million bucks a mile for bike lanes"

      While I agree with the sentiment of bikes slowing 45+ mph traffic lanes, $1,000,000 per mile for a 3 foot strip of asphalt and paint sounds like B.S. propaganda.

    45. Re:E-bikes will stall for one simple reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are not 3 foot strips. They are nearly a full car-lane width. $1M/lane-mile is the going rate, or so I thought. I just looked it up and found it's about $850k per 2-lane mile, so you're right. We're paying more like $300-400k per mile for those bike lanes. Thanks for the heads-up.

  4. Not where I live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Plus streets are for cars, silly.

    1. Re: Not where I live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, I switched from car bicycle because it is faster. My wifes loves it too, it feels better, and I enjoy the city on another level.

    2. Re:Not where I live by hawguy · · Score: 2

      Indeed.

      The day I can go up to 30 miles one way daily on a bike in a timely manner, is the day I start getting in shape.

      Otherwise, I'll have to keep using my car.

      I think you got that backwards -- "The day you can go up to 30 miles one way daily on a bike in a timely manner is when you'll be in shape". Driving your car is not likely to get you into shape. But I think you mean 30 miles *each* way, or you have a very unusual commute.

    3. Re: Not where I live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where I live it would be considered suburbs for a long way. It is in Florida, so there is a lot of land. We build out, not up. The closest to a city would be about 30 minutes drive on a highway, which is only as dense as the outer rim of other cities.

      I've seen cities such as Baltimore and D.C. I don't care for them at all. The suburbs between the cities is pretty great thou. If I lived in such a place like Miami, a bike may work out, but a car is needed outside of cities. No way around that.

      Anyways, about bikes on the roads. Where I am, they aren't really an annoyance. Motorcycles are worse than bikes. With bikes, they usually have bright colors that stand out, and are on the right side of the road in their own thin lane and are typically used for exercise / training instead of going to work. See more people walking to work (local stores) than biking. I have trouble with motorcyclists riding black bikes wearing all black coming out of areas shaded by trees around a gentle corner. Did look, didn't see anything. Didn't hit him, but I can only assume I cut him off as he sped up beside me to throw the finger up. /shrug. No idea if he was speeding, which is standard on that road.

      Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I was just surprised about how poor the roads up north are. We get a pot hole, it is fixed within a week. There was a stretch of road that may have been one of the best roads in the state, and they decided to repave 100 feet of it for some reason. No idea why. Didn't add any traffic light stuff or anything noticeable. Major roads are repaved at night, you'd think they could do the same up there with so many easy detours. I hear it is the salt (for snow) that ruins the road, but they should have ways of handling that now.

    4. Re: Not where I live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, we 'handle it' by patching the roads all spring/summer/fall. It's not like anyone could afford to repair all the surface streets if a better material came to light tomorrow anyway. :)

    5. Re:Not where I live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he's saying it's a catch 22.
      Biking would make him fit, but he needs to be fit enough to keep to a schedule to be able to bike.

    6. Re:Not where I live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are plenty of e-bikes/pedel electrics which can you get you where you want.

      Given your distance and wanting to get in some shape I recommend a 'pedelec' or 'pedel electric'. Essentially these bikes generally require you pedal like a normal bike, but employ some sort of sensor (i recommend torque) to determine how much help to give the rider.

      I have a 2015 Specialized Turbo X which can do 26mph up to 60 miles and the charger can charge the battery in 3 hours. This makes commuting 30 round trip completely doable. Given 30 round is exactly 60 I would recommend bringing a travel charger, so you can top out during work hours and no have to deal with range anxiety.

      To maintain 26 requires a considerable amount of effort and I guarantee you will get in shape if you try (its fun). More realistically at first you will average 18 - 22 mph depending on your health, wind. hills but with not near the effort required normally.

      I wish it was easier for people to try ebikes out given the commitment, but I can say its the best 2500$ (got it on sale, November is great month for bike sales) I have ever spent and in 3 months have already put 1500 miles on it!

      The bikes are only getting better though. Smaller, lighter, faster, with longer range. They even have Race pedelecs now that do 48 mph up to 100 miles! No cheap though....

  5. It's not safe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I own a bicycle and have taken trips a half dozen times on the city streets. If I lived with an area with less hills it may be less of a problem but in southern California, we have plenty of hills. Combine that with traffic that isn't going to worry about you and it can be quite scary riding a bicycle.

    As far as a motorcycle on the free goes; I like the idea but the accidents I've seen involving motorcycles almost always go poorly for the cyclist and never the car. Something about the rules of physics comes into play here.

    Making it electrical won't change things on a practical level in the least. Americans love their gas guzzlers and gas is under $3 in California for the rest of the day and under $2 in many states. No one cares about conserving something so cheap.

    I predict this will take off as well as motorcycles in general have taken off. That's the most optimistical outlook.

    1. Re:It's not safe... by kheldan · · Score: 1

      It's not safe for you. I and many people I know ride a couple hundred miles a week on public roads for years and years, and surprise, we're still alive, have all our original body parts, and aren't scared little rabbits while we're doing it. By all means, if you find riding on public roads too scary, then please don't ride on them, but I'd prefer you take some classes or go ride with local cycling clubs or groups and get some experience and the confidence that goes with it.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    2. Re: It's not safe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, the Steve Irwin fallacy. You may continue, it's your life. I'll stay in my car, where when the unexpected happens at least the damage has a chance of being mutual.

    3. Re:It's not safe... by ThorGod · · Score: 1

      It's not safe where I live either. You would be biking in well north of 100f, highly polluted air, and traffic that WANTS to kill you.

      --
      PS: I don't reply to ACs.
    4. Re:It's not safe... by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      Electric bikes are very risky and many people drive too fast with them. They are killing machines. You don't drive too fast with normal bikes because usually you don't have the power in your legs, but e-bikes give you the ability to drive in more life threatening speeds.

      But I don't mind people using e-bikes. As long as its nobody I care about its just fine. e-bike riders only risk their own lives, not the ones of the others. Its something different with cars, where often the people who actually cause an accident go off well, and innocent people get injured or die.

    5. Re:It's not safe... by kheldan · · Score: 0

      I'm really not an advocate of e-bikes to start with, especially here in the U.S.; too many people are fat and unfit, and they should just pedal a normal bike if they want to ride, they need the exercise! However most e-bikes are the 'pedal assist' variety, which only supply motor power when you're pedaling, not allowing you to use it like a scooter, so at least the e-bike people will still get some exercise. So far as the whole concept of e-bikes goes, I don't really think they'll 'catch on' because they're too expensive. For what one costs you can buy a small used motorcycle or scooter or even a moped, not have to worry about battery charging, and has a full set of lights and signals, better brakes, etc.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    6. Re: It's not safe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not a fallacy at all. Your chances of dying from lazy lifestyle, or car-caused polution, is much higher than dying in a bicycle accident. His advice is very accurate. Look at NYC and the bike renewal there.

    7. Re:It's not safe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Electric bicycles, can be just the answer to hills. One with properly calibrated assist can make going up a steep hill only slightly more difficult than pedaling on the flatland.

      As far as safety.... Life is not safe, and we all have our own risk thresholds.

    8. Re: It's not safe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't say it was safer, in fact I implied it's more dangerous but I'd rather have mutual destruction over just me being destroyed.

    9. Re:It's not safe... by sheetsda · · Score: 1

      Combine that with traffic that isn't going to worry about you and it can be quite scary riding a bicycle.

      Actual conversation between my wife and I one night:

      Her: "Geeze! Did you pass that bicycle close enough?"
      Me: "What bicycle???"

      At least there's no excuse for these electric varieties to not have lights.

      Making it electrical won't change things on a practical level in the least. Americans love their gas guzzlers

      Americans don't give a crap about gas but we loathe wasting time and money. Make a cheap electric vehicle that can reach the speed limit in short order and Americans will jump on board. Tesla has roughly right idea, if they could just get the price of the vehicle lower than the price of a cheap ICE ($17,000) + its entire lifetime of gasoline cost ($3 gal * 125,000 miles / 25 mpg = $15,000). They're on the right track with the Model X. Given the pollution aspect government subsidies could be extremely helpful here, but politically that'll only happen when ...
      1. Detroit starts pushing for it and
      2. conservative politicians stop "being skeptical" that pollution is even a thing and that the free market is sacred, never to be touched by unclean government hands.

    10. Re: It's not safe... by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      Why would someone in a car be more prone to die of car-caused pollution than a cyclist? I've been blasted in the face with black smoke countless times when riding a bike, but never on the bus.

    11. Re:It's not safe... by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      I don't know about now, but when I was a kid, golf carts were allowed on the road in Sun City, AZ and many people used them instead of cars.

    12. Re:It's not safe... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "Electric bikes are very risky and many people drive too fast with them.'

      This is also true of any car. The proper place for e-bikes is as a hybrid: you crank at a constant rate, storing battery power on the flat that can be given back to you on hills. You can arrive at work without needing a shower before you can sit at your desk.

    13. Re:It's not safe... by Whatsmynickname · · Score: 1

      I and many people I know ride a couple hundred miles a week on public roads for years and years, and surprise, we're still alive, have all our original body parts, and aren't scared little rabbits while we're doing it.

      You haven't met your "driver looking at their cell phone at facebook of fate" coming directly behind you yet. Like you, I have been riding along with traffic for 40 years. I've done it in bicycle hostile territory such as western Pennsylvania. 6 months ago I very narrowly missed getting rear ended by some ahole in a BMW and wound up with a broken rib / punctured lung. Don't ride during the work week anymore, just the weekend and in low traffic density areas.

      I've talked to a person who trained for RAAM and he's not riding as much on the street anymore either. Mostly mountain biking now.

      Have you paid attention to the number of people talking on their cell phones while driving lately? TONS of them in Southern California. This should scare the shit out of any sane cyclist. Just today I had to slam on my brakes when some cell phone ahole almost ran into me as he erratically cut in front of and into me to turn off a freeway. Just because you have not encountered one of these people yet, does not mean the problem does not exist.

      When you put an electric motor on a two wheeled vehicle and start inserting yourself into this stream of traffic, things get worse, a LOT worse. I also ride a motorcycle and have seen what can happen already.

    14. Re: It's not safe... by bitingduck · · Score: 1

      Not just car-caused pollution, it's also reduced fitness due to less exercise than if you cycled. I haven't checked for recent studies, but the slight increased risk from traffic on a bicycle is more than compensated by improved health and fitness.

    15. Re:It's not safe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American's don't give a crap about each other. It's not a time/money wasting thing. In fact, we happily waste both time and money if we can be comfortable and either ignore or annoy everybody else. You can't do that easily with a bicycle, electric or otherwise, or even most motorcycles other than Harleys. You can with cars.

      As for time ... some cars (my newly-bought used Prius, for instance) track average speed as well as mpg for trips tracked with the trip odometer. In the suburban area where I live, during the day when other people are around, most trips of 3-5 miles (the minimum drive to do nearly anything) average no more than 15 mph, usually closer to 10. None of the signals are synchronized, and there's a stop sign on average about every 1/4 mile on all but the busiest arterials. The speed limit on the arterials is usually 40-50 mph, but the signals pull the average down well into bicycle range.

      By actual timing, I can match drive time for most trips under 3-4 miles, and be close or better if parking's an issue for trips up to 5-6 miles, and I am NOT in shape or in any way a competitive cyclist (10-15mph is my cruising speed, with spurts to 25-30 on long downhills). If an electric bike would help with getting back up the hills (where I lose most of my time) without weighing down the other riding a lot, it would be useful.

      * Every bicycle weighs 50 lb. If the bike weighs 20 the lock weighs 30. If the bike weighs 30 the lock weighs 20. If the bike weighs 50 it doesn't need a lock.

    16. Re: It's not safe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Golf carts are allowed on any road in AZ as long as they don't exceed 25mph and aren't going less than 10mph under the posted speed limit...so any road 35mph or less is fair game.

    17. Re:It's not safe... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Did that, 10 miles a day, 100 days. No real issues.

    18. Re:It's not safe... by kheldan · · Score: 1

      Listen friend, I've been riding motorcycles as well for decades (for 10 years all I had was a motorcycle; have at least half a million miles I can account for on all 7 of them I've owned, including the current one) and know damned well how dumb some drivers can be, have grown eyes in the back of my head, and naturally expect people in vehicles to damned near try to kill me on purpose -- and it doesn't stop me from riding a motorcycle, or training for road racing on my bike, out on public roads all over the place, or taking it into traffic, etc. I'm just aware of what's going on. Some people here on Slashdot think that people need to not be allowed to drive at all and have a machine do it. I think that's bullshit, I think we need to train drivers better and test them more rigorously and frequently, and I think that average cyclists need to be educated and trained better, too, because I see them all the time also doing dumb things, or assuming that since they're on a bike they don't need to maintain a high level of awareness of their situation at all times.Of course the bike haters and the 'self-driving car' people would have bicycles completely banned from all public roads everywhere, and you'd better believe it's true.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    19. Re: It's not safe... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Over 30,000 people lose their lives every year in cars. To reach that number would take half a fucking century for cyclists.

      That's only because there are so few of you, and you get so little done.

      ...cyclists are either 3.4x or 11.5x as likely to die as motorists, per passenger mile. Neither conclusion is very happy.

      If you managed to put in as many miles on your bikes as people manage to put in on their cars, you (as a group) would die three times as much from it as you do now, because you already die vastly more per mile traveled than do motorists.

      The notion that you are somehow safer without a crash cell is hilarious, but wrong.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    20. Re:It's not safe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many electric bikes have you ridden?

    21. Re: It's not safe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just car-caused pollution, it's also reduced fitness due to less exercise than if you cycled. I haven't checked for recent studies, but the slight increased risk from traffic on a bicycle is more than compensated by improved health and fitness.

      People making this point seem to be assuming those who don't yet bicycle to work are leading sedentary lifestyles (cue the fat American jokes). Sure, if you're a human potato, adding 30 minutes of moderate cycling five days a week will likely improve your health. However, if you're already leading a healthy active lifestyle, then a little extra moderate cycling isn't going to boost your health noticeably, if at all. Of course, the latter assumes the active lifestyle comes from things you enjoy (e.g., playing sports, exercising the dog, etc.) rather than forcing yourself into a jog you loathe every morning (which could simply be replaced with the cycling).

      Regarding the car pollution, that only meaningfully decreases once a bunch of us start commuting by bicycle. Until that happens, we'd mostly get less traffic fumes within our cars (less exposure time, less breathing, plus some filtering whenever windows are closed) than on a bicycle, assuming the same route. That wouldn't apply if you can get to work largely via bike lanes through parks and such.

      - T

  6. Given the excess energy stored in love handles by ffkom · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... the much better trend for the US would be an increased use of non-electric, traditional bicycles.

    1. Re:Given the excess energy stored in love handles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't be that hard. Any vehicle that depends on oil or electricity is ultimately under government control. If they want to shut down your freedom of transportation they can.
      Non-electric traditional bicycles are the fastest way of transportation that can't be controlled by the government. The ultimate symbol of freedom.

    2. Re:Given the excess energy stored in love handles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still better than using a car, it's still a bicycle not a scooter, you still have to, you know pedal.

      Captcha: "boring". Yeah, I know.

  7. They shouldn't by mrun4982 · · Score: 2

    "because cyclists are feeling safer on the roads"... they shouldn't or else they're just fooling themselves. In the US in general, people driving cars/trucks don't like cyclists.

    1. Re:They shouldn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its true,

      source i dont like cyclists on the street

    2. Re:They shouldn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More accurate to say people driving do not like delays. Bicycles in vehicle traffic lanes are a delay even if just a delay in reaching the next red light. A small few have an active antipathy to cycles but most problems are due to people avoiding the obstruction that bicycles are seen as.

      Electric bikes won't make any difference in the perception as a delay since they will still be going slower than traffic and the recognition is bicycle = slow = pass it.

      It is possible to sell an activity that is somewhere between frustrating and dangerous as a cost savings. Competing against an even larger cost savings with added exercise makes it a tough sell.

    3. Re:They shouldn't by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      , people driving cars/trucks don't like cyclists

      Generally false. We don't SEE them, and expect they are looking out for us, being the lighter, more nimble and better sighted vehicle. Even big motorcycles are hard to see, nevermind a skinny little bike.

      Now it is true that a cyclist holding up traffic makes people angry, and angry people may not use best judgement. There are some roads where bicycles just shouldn't be, or else the rides should be widened so that bicycles can be without disrupting traffic.

    4. Re:They shouldn't by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 1

      That's generally because they blow red lights and act like complete twats.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    5. Re:They shouldn't by bitingduck · · Score: 2

      Even big motorcycles are hard to see, nevermind a skinny little bike.

      You aren't looking around enough. If you're used to looking for bicycles, they're easy to see. If you're used to looking for motorcycles, they're easy to see. Lane sharing by motorcyclists is legal in California, so if you're driving you have to expect that motorcycles are going to come up the apparently non-existent lane between you and the next car. They're easy to see if you actually look.

    6. Re: They shouldn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they're still smaller and slower and quieter than motorcycles, which are much smaller than cars. Get your selfish smugness out of the way of those of us who are hourly and losing money to your assholishness.

    7. Re:They shouldn't by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0

      Are you talking about cyclists or divers? Sounds like drivers, but I'm not sure given the context.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  8. winter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    the same reason no bikes ever "win over" north america

  9. Ambivalence by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

    On one hand, I'd like to see them become a lot more popular here, because I'd like to get some parts to convert my mountain bike to an electric human hybrid, and I'd like to get them cheap. On the other hand, I don't really want more cyclists on the road. I want them to have someplace to ride, but I don't want it to be the same place I'm driving. So I sure hope not.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. Will never happen in the U.S by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Some reasons: Americans have a pathological hate for cyclists. They think that roads are built for cars and not transport in general, and all American drivers think they own the road they drive on. To many Americans, burning gas and spewing fumes is a merit, while being efficient or conservative is usually frowned upon and considered un-American or "for poor people". The more miles and gallons you can brag about, the more and the better you are.

    The culture also has a more difficult time accepting e-bikes because they are not "cool", and that's a big factor. Which is a bit funny considering how many of them drive in permobils or electric scooters when they do their shopping.

    1. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      They think that roads are built for cars and not transport in general,

      To be fair, that is why a huge number of them were built.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's it like to be a smug asshole that everyone hates?

    3. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Some reasons: Americans have a pathological hate for cyclists. They think that roads are built for cars and not transport in general, and all American drivers think they own the road they drive on.

      Living in a college town there are reasons other than the ones you quote, like 'Murricans wannd burn gas and the other tripe you spewed.

      Around my little city, most of the Car/bike accidents result in a citation against the bike rider, as many consider stop signs and traffic lights not for them. And in the downtown area, the typical accident is a bike blowing through a traffic light and hitting a car on the side. Riding 5 abreast to the middle of the road - even with a bike lane - is also popular.

      Some riders have such a bitched up attitude, they become counter productive. I was assisting with a bike road race, following behind the last riders, and one of them got pissed at me because I wouldn't pass him. Went all apeshit on me. Dropped back a couple times to I suppose kick the door. Spent a while swearing at me. I let him, then announced who I was. A simple radio call to the next way station, and he was disqualified for abuse of an official.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    4. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by Hasaf · · Score: 2

      I question this assumption. I work in a extremely typical small town in Kansas and I use my e-bike for all local transportation. If I need to go further I fly.

      I get, almost universally, positive comments. Sure, there are a few jerks; but that is just the way they are, the e-bike really has nothing to do with it. The reality is that most people don't even notice that it is an e-bike. As a means of transportation it works quite well.

    5. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by reboot246 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Around here when you see a grownup on a bicycle the first thought you have is that's a person who has lost his license to drive.

      Please keep your toys off the roads.

    6. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      In the 1980's, mopeds were very cool and essentially the same capabilities as an ebike. Apparently you can even by electric mopeds at walmart for $250.

    7. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      They think that roads are built for cars and not transport in general,

      To be fair, that is why a huge number of them were built.

      False.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    8. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      My college town mixes scooters and pickup trucks on the road. It's pretty grisly when the trucks forget to stop (and it does happen.)

    9. Re: Will never happen in the U.S by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are there any fat people around where you live?

    10. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my area, the official accident records show that the bicyclist are at fault 2/3 of the time. This is because the bicyclists are self important assholes that don't obey basic traffic rules and basic traffic courtesy. I've bicycled since high school and have never had an issue in all my years of bicycling. I've always obeyed the rules of the road and come to a full stop at red lights and stop signs. One of the basic rules include pulling over and letting traffic by when you have more than 5 vehicles behind you. A lot of bicyclists are just plain rude. They cause their own accidents more often than not.

      Licensed drivers have to at least pass inadequate driving tests in the US, but there's still many idiots on the road. Bicyclists don't have to take any tests and many of them don't know the laws of the road. The worst ones are the rich weekend warrior types with their $1000+ bicycles and their fancy wannabe racing gear clothing. They already think they own the road in their expensive beemers/teslas/porches and that carries over into their bicycling attitudes. I've seen many near accidents, and those are generally the fault of the cyclists doing something stupid and illegal. It's actually amazing that there aren't more accidents caused by the bicyclists.

    11. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't stand it when someone brings up all your shortcomings etc. can you? The American ego is massive and needs constant polishing and affirmation. And you always want to be the best at everything and in all aspects. Well, you never were, and your culture has degraded to the point where you and your country are laughing-stock in many ways. And you're too lazy to change it.

    12. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      To be fair, a large number were actually made for bicycles

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    13. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      To be fair, a large number were actually made for bicycles

      Sure, up until about 1900... in the USA. The states with the most miles of road, however, did not participate in the Good Roads movement:

      Texas 675,580
      California 394,608
      Illinois 305,872
      Kansas 287,100
      Minnesota 285,084
      Missouri 273,589
      Georgia 271,920
      Florida 271,024

      So, uh, no. Most roads were made for cars, not bikes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      In the 1980's, mopeds were very cool

      You must be about my age if you think mopeds were cool in the 80s, but the fat chicks and mopeds joke goes back to the 70s

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like a comment that someone from "around here" and who has never been a single mile "out there" might post.

    16. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      So, uh, no. Most roads were made for cars, not bikes.

      Uh no again. You know, you sound like such a typical entitled car driver, who believes the world revolves around him.

      Step out of your car and actually read. Firstly, I said many, not most. Second, you also seem to forget about the existence of goods vehicles, you know like lorries which aren't in fact cars. And finally many roads, like a large part of the interstate network, were built in no small part for national defence reasons.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    17. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Second, you also seem to forget about the existence of goods vehicles, you know like lorries which aren't in fact cars.

      What's interesting about them is that when a bicyclist fucks one of them up, they're fucking us all up. So yeah, that's an argument against cyclists.

      And finally many roads, like a large part of the interstate network, were built in no small part for national defence reasons.

      Which is still not an argument for bicycles.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The worst ones are the rich weekend warrior types with their $1000+ bicycles and their fancy wannabe racing gear clothing.

      On that note, I've always wondered why those pants have the padding in the pants. Makes them look like they shart themselves.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    19. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      I never thought they were cool, but definitely very very popular. When you say 80's, it's one of the first things I think of along with Miami Vice, soft focus and Nagels.

    20. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      What's interesting about them is that when a bicyclist fucks one of them up, they're fucking us all up. So yeah, that's an argument against cyclists.

      I know it happens a lot. Only the other day I saw a cyclist crash into a lorry. It was totally fucked up. The lorry was split nearly clean in half and the driver went to hospital.

      Seriously though what on earth are you talking about?

      Which is still not an argument for bicycles.

      No, but it is a rebuttal of your argument against bicycles. Your argument was more or less: roads are for cars. Roads are clearly also for bicycles, goods vehicles and the military, so clearly your argument is false.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    21. Re: Will never happen in the U.S by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just pedal down the road for a few hours, and I promise you'll get it.

    22. Re: Will never happen in the U.S by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Just pedal down the road for a few hours, and I promise you'll get it.

      I know the purpose, it just seems like maybe since the contact points are on the seat, maybe they might be a fine place to put the padding.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    23. Re:Will never happen in the U.S by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      No, you are dumb, and you didn't even read your own article, which says, "roads were now always designed with motors in mind."
      Or maybe you have trouble applying the logic of what you read. Do a better job reading, please.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    24. Re: Will never happen in the U.S by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      The way it was explained to me is to reduce friction on skin. Having the padding fixed to the seat means the pant/skin rubs against the seat with every pedal stroke. Moving the padding to the skin allows the friction to move from the skin/pant boundary to the internal cushion/pant boundary. Apparently it makes a big difference to serious riders.

      Thank goodness I am not a serious rider, I just wear regular pants. I haven't noticed excessive friction on my ~25/mile day round trip commute. I think it's sort of like other hobbies where people almost compete to see who can spend more on fancy equipment. I am happy on my $200 bike and the few upgrades I have made are to make my life easier - bulletproof tires, nice solid cargo rack, water compatible brake pads.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    25. Re: Will never happen in the U.S by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The way it was explained to me is to reduce friction on skin. Having the padding fixed to the seat means the pant/skin rubs against the seat with every pedal stroke. Moving the padding to the skin allows the friction to move from the skin/pant boundary to the internal cushion/pant boundary. Apparently it makes a big difference to serious riders.

      Thanks much!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  11. Oil/Gasoline is too cheap in the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It won't happen quickly, because oil and therefore gasoline is still too cheap. Also, the rich weekend warriors jock types mock anyone using electric bicycles. There's a social stigma.

    1. Re:Oil/Gasoline is too cheap in the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't have to be a rich jock to mock them. As a matter of fact, I suspect a lot of riders are rich jocks.

      captcha: dismount

  12. We need more cycling traffic by burtosis · · Score: 0

    Hopefully we can get more bicycle traffic, of any kind. There are huge numbers of dedicated cycling lanes around here which have taken the place of traffic lanes. Auto congestion is now much higher and it's very rare to see even a single person use them.

    1. Re:We need more cycling traffic by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      I'm driving a bicycle as well and it always fills me with joy when I ride past a lane of standing cars.

    2. Re:We need more cycling traffic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until someone opens their passenger side door as you approach.

      You aren't attached to those teeth, are you? Figuratively, I mean.

    3. Re:We need more cycling traffic by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      If the e-bike riders were not so frakken dangerous, I'd support parent post's pov.

      But the truth is that e-bikes enable Momma and Poppa Chubbs to get out on the bike paths at the same speeds that bikers with years of adult experience attain, and these super fast idiots who haven't been on a bike since their middle school years are a danger to everyone. They are all over the road. They don't know how to stop. They don't know how to assess potential risks before it is too late to avoid them. They go sliding on leaves and other loose stuff. They bash themselves up, and cause crashes that involve other bicyclists.

      Just because you once were proud of being able to ride your first bike faster than your other grade school buddies could run at maybe 5 or 6 mph, does not mean you can control your 200+ pounds of person, bike, motor, and battery at 15 or 20 mph on a busy bike path. You've got a lot more inertia now, but the contact surface between tires and road is no bigger than when you and your bike weighed half as much, and more than likely you are not even as strong as you were back then.

      We do need more people biking, walking, and using buses and trolleys. But the word has to be spread widely and loudly: If you have not learned to handle a conventional multigear bike as an adult, you would be a total danger to yourself and others in taking an e-bike out on a public path or road.

    4. Re:We need more cycling traffic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then that bicyclist pulls you out of your car and beats the ever living shit out of your 450lb fat ass.

    5. Re: We need more cycling traffic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The fundamental problem isn't bikes, it's that in our society it's a basic human right to drive poorly and dangerously. If you see someone doing something stupid on a bike, consider that the alternative is not that they stay doing stupid things in the privacy of their own home. Putting someone who can't assess risks in a car instead is NOT an advantage.

    6. Re:We need more cycling traffic by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      How much longer do you have on your sentence for assault?

    7. Re:We need more cycling traffic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been cycling regularly for the past 20 years and never hit a car door once. People don't open doors unless they are parked, if they are parked and you see someone in the car, assume they will open the door without looking and give them clearance.

      There is a very slim chance that a passenger will decide to get out when the car is stuck in traffic, but if you are passing on the passenger side, clearance can often be tight and you'd want to go slowly and carefully, or actually go round the outside and overtake in a proper fashion.

    8. Re: We need more cycling traffic by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      While AC's point is valid, it misses the truth that the skills a bicyclist needs in assessing road risks are very different, and much more critical, than the skills a motorist needs. The parent post implies that a skilled motorist would be just as safe on a bicycle as he is in a car, and that is so very wrong. A skilled motorist has a vast amount of more learning to do before he is safe on bike (and not a threat to others on the road).

    9. Re:We need more cycling traffic by kyrsjo · · Score: 1

      Which is why you don't go close to a line of parked cars...

  13. Another market they are making inroads by willworkforbeer · · Score: 4, Funny

    Professional cycling races.

    --
    Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
    1. Re:Another market they are making inroads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be mistaken. That would be against the rules.

    2. Re: Another market they are making inroads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahahahaha, now that is funny. As if anyone in cycling follows the rules.

    3. Re:Another market they are making inroads by jkroll · · Score: 1

      You must be mistaken. That would be against the rules.

      Not sure if you are being sarcastic or not. While there have been several accusations, so far only one confirmed case.

  14. Overpriced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A halfway decent bike is already grossly overpriced, often costing well over $1000. Electric bikes are even worse.

    1. Re:Overpriced by hawguy · · Score: 1

      A halfway decent bike is already grossly overpriced, often costing well over $1000. Electric bikes are even worse.

      You don't have to spend $1000+ for a halfway decent bike. I paid $600 for my commute bike -- 5 years and about 10,000 miles later, I've put new wheels, new tires, a couple chains, brake pads, and front chainring and rear gear cluster into it, so maintenance cost around $500.

      So, the bike cost me less than $20/month so far, but I don't see why it won't last me another 5+ years without any major maintenance, so monthly cost will continue to decrease.

      You can, of course, spend much more, my "fun" road bike cost me $2500. It's much lighter than the commute bike and more "fun", but not something that I'd put a rack/panniers on or put fenders on to ride in the rain.

    2. Re:Overpriced by Whatsmynickname · · Score: 1

      You don't have to spend $1000+ for a halfway decent bike. I paid $600 for my commute bike -- 5 years and about 10,000 miles later

      Have you gone into a bicycle shop lately? A LOT LOT harder today to spend less than $1000 and not come out with the cheapest of cheap components or crappy frame.

    3. Re:Overpriced by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      I spent 100 pounds on my bike, then rode it heavily in all weathers for over a decade. I think I spent far more on it in maintainance than it cost. Original parts are the frame, gear levers (though someone stole a screw from one ---weirdest theft ever), handlebars (slightly bent), front chainrings (worn asymmetric teeth now), pedal cranks and the seat post. The gear changes over the years actually wore a hole through the front derailleur.

      Still, the overall price was low and it did many miles. It also looks like utter crap which means it never got stolen.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Overpriced by Malc · · Score: 2

      Yeah bicycles are such great value. I've been riding a 1987 Trek that I bought in 1997 second hand for $125 from a guy who used to ride it up in to the mountains from Denver. It picked up some rust from all the winter road salt from almost 10 years in Toronto, and it's been carrying me 15-20km eachway in out of central London everyday for the last six years. Same wheels for 20 years, although straightened a few times, same bottom bracket, etc. Had to change the everything the chain touches once because I wore them out... I've clearly been ignoring the maintenance schedule proposed by most serious bike people! My health and bank balance are very happy with this arrangement.

    5. Re:Overpriced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nonsense. You can get a lot of bicycle for five to six hundred dollars.

      However, the internet and Wal-Mart effect has hit the bicycles industry the same way it has hit many industries.

    6. Re:Overpriced by Rob+Bos · · Score: 1

      16,000 kilometres over 5 years? Well done, I commute to work a few days a week over the summer and I struggle to put on 1,200km/year. Props!

    7. Re:Overpriced by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Same wheels for 20 years, although straightened a few times, same bottom bracket, etc.

      Interesting. Mine was cheap and had an unsealed bottom bracket. That lasted about 5 years, got replaced with a sealed unit. The wheels... I've been through several rear wheels. Most recently the nut siezed so badly, I had to cut the axle off to change the tire. Not worth replacing the axle on that wheel. The rear ones get a lot more punishment (extra weight), chain thrown into the spokes (after someone bashed up the deraillier when parked in a bike rack) and other misc. abuse. With cheap wheels it's not worth doing a complete rebuid. I can't recall now why the front one had to go.

      Had to change the everything the chain touches once because I wore them out... I've clearly been ignoring the maintenance schedule proposed by most serious bike people!

      Ehhh I never bothered with the whole "oh you must replace everything at once" thing the fanatics seem to espouse. The teeth on my front chain rings are worn to a funny shape now, and I've been through several rear blocks (on my third). The first one started freewheeling both ways, the second lost its grip on the small sprocket, naturally while I was pushing very hard though amazingly I didn't wipe out. The chain gets replaced regularly since I have no chain guard and in winter, you either have enough oil to keep the salt out (and get a nice grinding paste as a result) or it rusts like hell. Regular all-weather riding makes chains a consumable.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    8. Re:Overpriced by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      I spent $200 on my box store bike. It's got 10k miles on it in 18 months, only routine maintenance. Thank god for cheap components and crappy frames!

      People in bike shops make hard fun of me, say my bike is a piece of shit. They can spend thousands if it makes them feel better, fine with me!

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  15. A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be OK by ukoda · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Having used eBikes for a daily commute in China I think they are a great technology, practical and affordable. The average price for an eBike was about USD $400 when I lived there a couple of years ago. Current eBikes outside of China appear to be grossly over priced. There are a few changes need if they wish to sell outside of China. The build quality needs to improve, quite doable. The speed restrictions need removed, typically 35kph which is too slow in cities outside China, 55kph (35mph) should make them able to mix with cars safely in cites. They currently have 500W motors which would probably need boosted to 750W-1KW for flat cites and 2-3KW for hilly cities.

  16. not so fast by tverbeek · · Score: 2

    I'm skeptical that electric-powered bikes will become very popular in the US. They're fairly similar in riding qualities (lightweight, easy to handle) and licensing requirements (pretty much none) to a 50cc motorscooter, and those have failed to take off, despite being widely available in the same price range for years. I've been a day-to-day scooterist for seven years, but I don't have a lot of company out there. Especially in the north, where they're a three-season vehicle (or one-season, for the less dedicated), they aren't seen as a viable substitute for a car. Even with 100mpg engines that cost almost nothing to fuel, the ability to park them almost anywhere, and a lot of other appealing features, most consumers just don't seem interested (which is too bad for them, because unless the roads are wet or icy, I'd much rather ride than sit in a car).

    An e-bike also suffers from being neither fish nor fowl. A 20mph bike is too slow to keep up with traffic in a motor-vehicle lane, but too fast to fit in with any human-powered traffic in a bicycle lane. I've ridden a 50cc scooter (mine was capable of 40mph) in 45mph zones, and believe me: motorists don't like you when you go under the speed limit in a motorized-vehicle lane. They'll eat a 20mph e-bike alive, even in a 25mph zone. But if that e-bike takes the bike lane (which isn't legal in many places), it will quickly overtake regular bicyclists, whom it won't be able to safely pass because bike lanes aren't designed for that. Dedicated lanes for motor-powered two-wheelers might help as an option for e-bikes and scooters (and motorcyclists who aren't in a hurry), but I don't see that happening until they become popular... ye olde Catch 22.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:not so fast by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      failed to take off

      They wee one of the defining status symbols of the 1980's.

    2. Re:not so fast by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      The key phrase there being "status symbol". There was a short-lived fad in which Puch mopeds and Honda Spree scooters were popular among upper-class 15-year-olds without proper driver licenses, but they never became a mainstream form of transportation. They started to make a comeback about eight years ago, thanks to skyrocketing gas prices, but as soon as Wall Street tanked the economy and drove gas prices down, the idea of investing a couple grand into another vehicle made people nervous.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    3. Re:not so fast by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

      Just because an e-bike _can_ do 20mph is no reason that it _has_ to do 20mph. I'd value the 300W assist cruising at a normal 12-15mph, if it meant I could arrive without being drenched in sweat.

    4. Re:not so fast by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      They were given a more than fair chance. Perhaps they didn't fit into the way most people live.

    5. Re:not so fast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >20mph ... too fast to fit in with any human-powered traffic in a bicycle lane.

      Brother, that's a load of shit. If you're in shape, 20 mph on a bicycle means you're cruising comfortably. Not working too hard but not spacing out either.

      I believe my record is 38mph, but that's with *all* the factors in my favor and in the prime of my "Austin hipster 'fuck cars'" phase.

      10-15 is dragging your feet.

      20 is like one or two notches above "keeping it slow so my girlfriend doesn't get discouraged".

    6. Re:not so fast by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Even with 100mpg engines that cost almost nothing to fuel,

      The problem is you vastly overestimate how useful 100 MPG is. MPG isn't a measure of fuel economy, it's the inverse of fuel economy. This has huge implications for fuel consumption and cost. Imagine you need to travel 100 miles.

      12.5 MPG full-size SUV = 8 gallons
      25 MPG sedan = 4 gallons
      50 MPG hybrid = 2 gallons
      100 MPG scooter = 1 gallon

      See how each time MPG doubles, the fuel saved (and thus money saved) is halved? It's counter-intuitive, but the bigger MPG gets, the less fuel you save. That 50 MPG increase going from 50 to 100 MPG only saves you as much fuel as a 1.8 MPG improvement going from 12.5 to 14.3 MPG. Not 50/1.8 = 27.8x as much fuel savings as the MPG figure implies. The rest of the world uses liters per 100 km to avoid this skewed perception problem that the inverse causes.

      Switching from the SUV to a sedan gives you 57% of the fuel savings you'd get switching to a scooter. Switching from a SUV to a hybrid gives you 86% the fuel savings. You're giving up a huge amount of utility, passenger and cargo capacity, and safety switching to a scooter to eek out that extra 14% of fuel savings. (Switching from a sedan to a hybrid gets you 67% the fuel savings you'd get switching to a scooter.) In nearly all cases it's just not worth it, and purchase price becomes the primary reason to get a scooter. (Also counter-intuitively, this means that the best place to be putting hybrid engines is in gas guzzlers like trucks and SUVs. Econoboxes like the Prius are the worst place to put a hybrid - that's where you can save the least amount of fuel possible.)

    7. Re:not so fast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brother, that's a load of shit. If you're in shape, 20 mph on a bicycle means you're cruising comfortably. Not working too hard but not spacing out either.

      32 km/h requires about 200 watts of power, on a flat without wind, according to this calculator. If you're moderately fit, that is indeed a comfortable effort.

      I'd estimate any human can get at least 100 watts out of his or her legs, 150 watts (~28 km/h) is usually no problem either.

      Professional cyclists are in the 400-700 watt range.

      My rule of thumb is that a 5 km/h speed increase needs a 50 % power increase.

    8. Re: not so fast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, thing is that the northern half of the country is generally wet/snowy road conditions for a third to half the year.

    9. Re:not so fast by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      An e-bike also suffers from being neither fish nor fowl. A 20mph bike is too slow to keep up with traffic in a motor-vehicle lane, but too fast to fit in with any human-powered traffic in a bicycle lane.

      And yet all of Europe has no problem with bicycles sharing the bike lane with mopeds at 20mph.

    10. Re:not so fast by btroy · · Score: 1

      I think you're dealing with a major difference in mindset between US and China. Because of disposable income US customer will pick the convenience of a car over an open environment (bicycle/Ebike). Things in the American psych that may not be in China (I'm US).
      - riding a bicycle will mat up your hair
      - it might rain, then what do I do?
      - I've got to drop the kids, get groceries and bike home in the dark - this isn't convenient.
      - the eBike is in the back of the garage, it is inconvenient.
      - it is too cold/hot - I'll be freezing/sweaty

      Hey, I bike commute to the bus and then to the office, so I know the life. You'll find others think it is abnormal and a big mindset.

      eBikes have been modernized and sold for years, go to a bike shop, you find it over in convenience bike section

    11. Re:not so fast by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      They are just normal bicycles that are really easy to pedal, even up hill. They are very low maintenance and the electric assist generally only works up to 20-30kph. They aren't competing with mopeds and scooters, or motorbikes.

      They simply make cycling more attractive by reducing the effort needed.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:not so fast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever ridden an ebike? They are similar in 'specifications' (maybe) but riding quality not even close....

      1) 50 cc smells like and sounds like crap.
      2) 50 cc don't get that great mileage for their size (100 - 200 mpg maybe). An electric bike is upwards to 2000 mpg ... We are comparing 6400 watts of energy
      (50cc) to around 200 - 500 watts from an electric bike (mine is 250w for example)... A human puts out between 0 - 400 watts continuous with 1500 watt peakish shape allowing ...
      3) Already mentioned this, but noise. Most ebikes are silent.
      4) Weight, ebikes generally now weigh less than 50 lbs. 50cc weight 250.
      5) Riding a bike is much different than riding a motorcycle, not just pedaling, but weight distribution and balancing. Its much more fun to ride a bike in my opinion.

      Overall my point is, I don't think it is wise to compare a 50cc to an electric bike. Maybe you should try one and then report back...

  17. Actually been to China and seen it by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 5, Informative

    I went to Shanghai and Hangzhou about 18 months ago, and saw this stuff for myself. The newly-built portions of these Chinese cities (ie the ones that used to be open fields 20 years ago or razed slums) have their nice and shiny new roads layed out as follows:
    1. Storefronts
    2. A portion of the sidewalk taken up by space for bikes and electric scooters, with power strips provided by shopkeepers for their customers
    3. Rest of the (wide) sidewalk
    4. Dedicated bike+electric scooter lane, maybe 6-8 feet wide
    5. Small median (~1-2 feet, bigger for bus stops)
    6. Traffic lanes, 4 or more lanes total, sometimes in groups of two or three, sometimes with a set of reversible lanes, sometimes dedicated bus lanes.
    5 downto 1 in reverse order on the other side.

    At almost all intersections, the bike lanes have separate traffic signals (usually overlapping with pedestrian walk signals), and sometime the bike lanes have separate left turn signals which coincide with exclusive left turn signals for the car lanes. If I remember right, the car left and right turn lanes can be either on the interior or exterior of the road and there are signs to indicate which set of lanes allow you to turn which way at the upcoming intersection. This is to deconflict turning vehicles from bikes/pedestrians going straight at the outside of the road.

    Overall, it was a pretty good system. But (especially in Shanghai) you could tell that half the people on the road didn't have an f'ing clue of how to operate a vehicle in traffic, and one time when I was riding a bus, a woman cut of the bus changing from one set of lanes to another (in a way that just wouldn't happen here) and got her rear tail light knocked out.

    The other thing is that this all takes space. You couldn't do it unless you were building from scratch or were willing to knock down large numbers of existing buildings. But the Chinese had to do it this way because maybe only half of their people can afford to own cars, and even fewer back when this was built 20 years ago. So the streets were layed out to accomodate an equal number of people on bicycles and buses/motor vehicles. That's a ready market for electric scooters.

    1. Re:Actually been to China and seen it by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Informative

      You couldn't do it unless you were building from scratch or were willing to knock down large numbers of existing buildings.

      Or you take the Dutch approach. Reclaim a lane from the road traffic. Put in place restrictions on driving within the city centre. Prioritise traffic lights for the bicycle flow instead of main traffic flow, and make this ubiquitous across a city.

      When a large portion of the population is doing normal trips on a bicycle you don't need all that space for cars.

    2. Re:Actually been to China and seen it by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Or you take the Dutch approach. Reclaim a lane from the road traffic.

      Most streets even in most cities don't have a lane to give up. As compared to the USA this is actually more common in Europe, where the roads were laid out before cars, except in London, which burned the fuck down. The roads are often likely to be one lane wide there. At least in the USA we built broad sidewalks in a lot of towns, but we have similar layout problems, simply not as severe.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Actually been to China and seen it by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Boston did try it. It doesn't work so well. First is the fact that the metro area is large enough that cycling isn't a realistic option, let alone a realistic year-round option for most people. Second is the fact that the whole place was layed out before cars, so when a four-lane road (of which there are few) becomes a tw-lane road, it hurts and causes traffic to clog. The corollary is that on many roads, it's not possible to drop alane because it's a two lane road already and is the only way in or out of a place without a very long detour, so they make it legal for bicycles to use the whole lane--on a road with a 40mph speed limit--which is just plain unsafe, but the bike lobby is loud and obnoxious and the politicians have a bug up their asses about looking like they're being green, so...

  18. US NEXT? HAHAHAHAHHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I've priced various electric bikes. They allow you to go slightly faster than you could on a good bike if you were in good shape, for slightly longer, and (most importantly reduce the annoyance of having to ride uphill or to a stop every few dozen feet).

    HOWEVER: Until the electric bike gets to be cheaper than a decent, used motorcycle, there's no way in fucking hell I'm buying one. Three thousand to six thousand bucks for a fucking bicycle? Are you goddmaned fucking shitting me?

    An '06 Kawasaki Ninja 250 costs what? And you want how much for that fucking bicycle?

    Ah hahahahhahahahahh FUCK YOU.

    Lower that price a WAYS, and we'll talk. More than a grand is fucking ridiculous. (I know the bike part is going to cost several hundred bucks unless it's a cheap department store piece of unridable fucking garbage, but the reality is I can ride a motorcycle for less than that bike costs, unless we're talking a Goldwing, or some shit like that.

    That reminds me... Are there any good Goldwings or other cruising bikes for sale near me on eBay?

  19. I commute on an e-bike by Hasaf · · Score: 1

    I use my e-bike for daily commuting. It is a low powered unit with a 350W geared hub motor. No wind cruse, under power is about 17mph, pedaling lightly gets me to about 20mph (after all, I am on my way to work, I have no intention of working hard to get there). Where the motor comes in handy is in shopping runs. When I have the bike and trailer loaded down heavy.

    The other place the motor makes a real difference is in a headwind. I am in South West Kansas, we have both wind and winter.

    Overall, this lifestyle saves me quite a bit of money. If I need to go a long distance I fly; even if I had a car, it is still cheaper to fly for long distances. If I need to go an intermediate distance I just rent a car.

    I now a lot of people will try to sputter some reason that it can't work; but for me it does.

    1. Re:I commute on an e-bike by mysticgoat · · Score: 2

      Parent post makes a good case for low powered e-bikes.

      Another case: when I was recovering from back surgery for a fractured spine, I got a used e-bike with a 500W motor, lead-acid batteries, sprung front fork, beach tires. My total moving weight was around 325 lbs, 340 lbs with baskets of groceries. Top speed was around 18 mph with lots of pedaling, best cruising speed using the motor in pedal-assist mode was 10 - 12 mph. This was excellent therapy as my bones knit together and I got back in shape after the months of very limited activity. One of the best parts is that the e-bike gave me the confidence to do 12 mile rides almost daily, knowing that the motor could get me back home if I over-estimated my capability or started getting back spasms.

      But I got rid of it as soon as I was healed enough to ride my road bike (no motor, cruising around 12 - 15 mph, good for 50 mile day trips by the end of the season). Now that I'm closer to 70 than 60 years old, I ride my "comfort bike" with its upright position and fat tires more than the road bike, and settle for 30 - 40 mile day trips. I will not willingly ride an e-bike ever again. They ain't much fun.

    2. Re:I commute on an e-bike by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      It isn't that it "can't work," it is that it is more expensive than a motorcycle. If you build it yourself, and don't count the time, that brings the cost down to what a used motorcycle costs, and that is including the title and registration. Insurance on a motorcycle isn't very much.

      In my State you can ride power-assisted bicycles in bike lanes if they can't go over 15mph, and what sells are internal combustion kits with a small wheel that presses on the bike rim. (like a bottle generator) They're loud and they stink, but they're cheap enough for people that can't afford a used motorcycle.

      Compared to a car, can you save money? Of course. Compared to a motorcycle or moped? Expect savings to be small, and that is if you got lucky and bought quality batteries.

  20. Theft problem by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

    Bike theft is one of the fastest growing crimes here in Europe. It will definitely get worse still a few years from now when the average bike is a $1500 e-bike instead of a $150 regular bike. There is an inherent problem with a vehicle that is both expensive enough to be worth stealing and lightweight enough that a person can just pick it up and walk away with it.

    1. Re:Theft problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...And for every bicycle stolen, there is somebody willing to buy it. _Every_ _single_ _bike_ that I've ever owned was eventually stolen. Six so far. They all went to at least six new owners, owners who have flexible concepts of ethics. It's almost certain that there were serial thefts involved; a bike may be stolen more than once. (I always bought new at retail...)

      This may seem part of the current bicycle culture, but it goes way back. De Sica even made a film about it back in 1948. Unlike, say as with Pogo-Sticks, there is a certain amount of street cred for those who steal bicycles. (Nobody would ever dare make a movie called "The Pogo Stick Thief".)

      Electric Bikes will be even more tempting. But here Tech comes to the aid. Butt Prints. Every Bike could be imprinted to the unique butt of the legal owner. Stealing the seat won't help, because the smarts, as usual, wouldn't be in the seat.

    2. Re:Theft problem by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      If you would buy Chinese made e-bikes instead of homegrown, they would cost $300 instead of $1500.

  21. No, because E-bikes mostly replace bicycles by erice · · Score: 1

    And not cars.

    The day that E-bikes take over in the US is the day *after* the bicycle infrastructure get so good, the distances so short, and the attitudes so much improved that everyone would be riding bicycles. This is unlikely. And if, somehow it did happen, it would actually be kind of sad. All that work to overhaul transportation, and Americans would still rather sit on their ass and coast rather than pedal.

    1. Re:No, because E-bikes mostly replace bicycles by Rob+Bos · · Score: 1

      Why do you think it has to be ubiquitous to be successful? It doesn't have to be used by everyone, at every time, in order to be useful.

      It's like people saying that Linux must be on 100% of all computers or it sucks. False.

    2. Re:No, because E-bikes mostly replace bicycles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of e-cyclists are people who are trying to get to the point where they can ride a bicycle (knee/hip replacements, other recoveries) or they are old-timers who rode a lot when younger and would like to be able to do some of the longer rides but might need some assistance.

  22. no showers by dltaylor · · Score: 2

    I have experimented with cycling to work (usually use a motorcycle). At no place I have ever worked have there been showers usable for the transition from cyclist to acceptable office occupant, and I really must have those facilities.

    1. Re:no showers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I find that stinking of sweat and wearing strange clothes adds to my professional mystique.

      I complete the effect by constantly posting on Slashdot.

    2. Re:no showers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My electric bike takes care of that problem. It's 80 out today, I rode in my usual 7 miles, no need for a shower.

      I wear my usual work clothes, which granted are not suit and tie. Rain means putting on rain pants and a rain coat.

      Coldest in winter is 20-30 degrees F. No problem there. Just glad there's no snow.

    3. Re:no showers by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Two words: Sponge bath.

      The last place I worked didn't have shower facilities. I would bike in and be all sweaty. I'd come into the office, drop off my bike, and grab two sponges, a towel, and a bar of soap that I kept in my desk. I'd wet down both sponges and soap up one of them. I'd go into the stall, strip down, wash myself with the soapy sponge, rinse myself with the wet sponge, dry myself with the towel, and put on work clothes. I might add some body spray, just in case. I'd wash the bike shirt and shorts in the sink and hang them up behind the servers. By the end of the day, they'd be dry.

      Now, where I worked didn't have a dress code, so "work clothes" was a pair of jeans and a T-shirt (which I carried in my backpack). I wasn't meeting with customers, usually, so this was mostly to keep my fellow employees happy. I asked around and never got a complaint.

    4. Re:no showers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A backpack, a rag(wet it in the bathroom), and spare clothes(change in a stall) can do the job.

      The big barrier is the same one the keeps people from brushing teeth after lunch at work.

      Fuckin petrified to do something everyone else isn't already doing.

    5. Re:no showers by radarskiy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Normal human beings do not maintain a racer's pace if they are not actually racing.

      A 3 mph walk will burn ~60 watts, which will get you 9 mph on a bicycle without being any more sweaty than walking for the same amount of time. Do you need a shower after walking from your car into the building where you work?

    6. Re:no showers by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      A 3 mph walk will burn ~60 watts, which will get you 9 mph on a bicycle without being any more sweaty than walking for the same amount of time.

      Okay, and if I walked to work, that would be relevant.

      Do you need a shower after walking from your car into the building where you work?

      No, because I only walk from my car into work, not the whole way from home. That was a seriously stupid comparison. I was going to say incredibly, but this is Slashdot, and you're at about par.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:no showers by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Just change clothes in the toilets. That's what s lot of people where I work do and it's fine. The sweat is absorbed by their riding clothes and they don't smell once changed. You can also get odour/sweat absorbing clothing (they infuse it with some kind of lactose product)... try Uniqlo.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:no showers by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      In Houston in summer, yes, you'd need a shower after any bike commute to work, even if you have to exert no energy at all.

    9. Re:no showers by tommeke100 · · Score: 2

      That really depends on the weather. No, You don't have to bike to work at 20 mph. But given a bit of heat, a nice 1 mile hill which needs some effort getting over, and some people would enjoy taking a shower before getting behind their desk.

    10. Re:no showers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since car to work is less than a minutes walk, no. Home to work on a warm day would be a very different matter.

    11. Re:no showers by Rob+Bos · · Score: 1

      I do this sometimes. Changing into clean clothes plus a little deoderant, maybe sponge down the pits and crotch a bit, and you're pretty much good to go.

      Also tip: drink down as much cold water as you can manage. It'll help you stop sweating sooner.

    12. Re:no showers by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      In Houston it is insane to go outside at any time of they year. I would not begrudge anyone who is unwilling to bicycle in those conditions.

    13. Re:no showers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you need a shower after walking from your car into the building where you work?

      Phoenix, AZ here. Yes, yes I do.

  23. bikeholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The e-bikes are too silent. This makes them a hazard when they overtake cyclists and pedestrians. Either require them to make a constant sound so you know they are approaching or give us back our guns. Right now e-bikes are just a legal way to murder people.

  24. Cell phone use on electric bicycles by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    Seen it twice in the last month. No earpiece.

  25. i would rather get a 250cc gas motorcycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they get upwards of 70 to 80 MPG and run at 65 MPH

    a little yamaha-XT250 or Suzuki-DR200 are nice little bikes,

  26. "cyclists are feeling safer on the roads"??? by saccade.com · · Score: 1

    Huh? With every driver now staring at their phone instead of watching the road, I find it hard to agree with this. Distracted drivers are deadly for cyclists. I wish e-bikes made some noise. Navigating streets in Shenzhen last summer, you had to constantly watch out for e-bikes whizzing by from every direction.

    1. Re:"cyclists are feeling safer on the roads"??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you had to take some personal responsibility for your own safety?
      In a Communist country even. Why didn't the nanny state protect you like back home?

  27. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by mysticgoat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    E-bikes that can exceed 20 mph need to be limited to cyclists who can pass a motorcycle license exam. At 35 mph an e-bike with its smaller tire-to-road surface area and poorer braking behavior is more dangerous than a motorcycle and requires more skill in the instantaneous risk assessment that is critical to safe driving of any vehicle. E-bikes in traffic lanes at faster than pedaling speeds are not only a threat to their riders, they are a hazard to all other drivers on the road.

  28. Why... by matbury · · Score: 1

    ...do Americans make such a big deal over something as simple, easy, and routine as riding a bike? Go anywhere else in the developed world (and a lot of developing countries too) and you'll see that a lot of people use bikes to get around. Really, it's not a big deal.

    1. Re:Why... by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      They don't, only /. and similar sites.

    2. Re:Why... by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Turn off your tee-vee, it is polluting your elitist brain. Bicycling is very normal thing in the US. Maybe your anti-Americanisms are not a big deal, but it is still pretty pathetic. Maybe you once visited some redneck American city and presumed the whole country is the same. I'll remember to judge you by assuming you're a French waiter.

    3. Re:Why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well build a wall in the French border and make them pay for it
      Fkn Caenadeans

    4. Re:Why... by matbury · · Score: 1

      Monsieur, je vous assure que je ne suis pas un garçon. The USA's a big-ass country so I'm sure there are some enclaves where people can cycle without being called hippies, freaks, weird, or even worse... poor! and without being run off the road. Do you live in Portland, by any chance?

  29. near where? by dltaylor · · Score: 2

    You posted as AC, so that only narrows the search to Earth and near-Earth orbit. Probably not too many in orbit, since they're incredibly heavy, and Antarctica doesn't have much infrastructure, but that still leaves at least 20% of the planet.

    1. Re: near where? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He did mention the Honda Goldwing, that narrows the search to retirement homes.

  30. Biking in the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Biking in the USA? That's socialist pinko communist bullshit. Every single American person (child and adult) must have at minimum one car each.

  31. I saw an electric scooter last week by Yesimbald · · Score: 1

    The one I saw was an high-end BMW http://www.bmwmotorcycle.com/c...
    At 15000€ it's out of reach and it's also too big but if someone manage to do something smaller with lesser top speed it could be great.
    Scooters are for inner city so autonomy shouldn't be an issue also it could resolve the two main problems with scooters nowadays: noise and air pollution.

  32. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by ukoda · · Score: 1

    Well the 20mph limit is a regional thing but yes it is relevant. We use a 300W limit so most existing Chinese eBike would be treated as motorcycles here anyway but at 20mph they have all the same risks that bicycle suffer from with not being able to join the other faster traffic. In many countries you could ride them with a car licence. The eBikes I rode had fat scooter tires and disk brakes were becoming common. Basically my argument is they should be up spec'd to match a typical 50cc scooter which is an ideal transport option in a city. The eBike can have all the advantages of a 50cc scooter without the high cost and all the hassles of gas stations and complicated maintenance etc.

  33. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

    You can buy conversion kits on ebay for under $200 and stick one on a $50 craigslist bike.

  34. Electric Skate Boards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More electric skate boards see here.

    Ha ha

  35. Uphill battle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its going to be difficult to sell them in the US for practical usage. Most people travel miles on your average commute, and fighting traffic traveling 50mph or more on a bike that is limited to 20 is bound to result in some tense moments. There may be a few situations where they'll work, such as inner city commuting and some rural areas with paved roads. But unless they can get them up to highway speeds while keeping the costs down they're going to find it very hard to attract a vast majority of US commuters.

  36. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

    Throw yourself off of a bike at 35mph and tell me how safe it is.

  37. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by ukoda · · Score: 1

    About as safe as falling off at 20mph and landing under a car doing 35mph? I watched a good friend of mine be killed by a car, she was riding at less than 5kph when the car drove over her. What's your point? I have been riding motorcycles since 1974 and all those years I have never felt the desire or need to throw my self off. My normal commute is on a VTR1000, 100KW, top speed 280kph. When commuting I do so at the same speed as the traffic when it is moving, and about 20kph when passing stationary traffic. In China they have physically separate lanes for the eBikes so the 35kph is fine as there is no cars to deal with. With most western cities there are a few token bike lanes but much of the time you share with cars so matching their speed helps. I would not recommend 100KW for commuting, but I would recommend enough power to say safe in the realities of typical cites.

    If you are really worried about a safe commute I think telecommuting might be your best option.

  38. Several Issues by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    In the warmer states an e-bike could be used all year round. In colder states it will take a very hardy and young person to use an e-bike in cold weather. Just as you see very few motorcycles when it's really cold you will see very few e-bikes. In the south we see people demonstrating enclosed bikes that go quite fast without so much effort but in our hot climates an enclosed bicycle is a torture chamber worse than a sauna, most of the year. this has to seriously effect what people are willing to pay for e-bikes as those bikes will be sitting several months of a year, unused and will need a car or pickup truck for a backup. Theft of bicycles has always been a problem and is largely ignored by police departments. for that to end we will need strong punishments frequently applied for those that steal bicycles or expensive parts from bicycles. in my state a car thief will almost never go to prison unless he has several prior convictions. i wonder how many $1,400 dollar e-bikes he would have to get caught stealing to actually be put in prison at all under our current system. We just might see the same type of conflict that is brewing with private drones. If far more people want to fly drones than commercial aviation then wouldn't commercial aviation have to shut down or move to remote, drone free areas? As e-bikes become the dominant road vehicles won't cars take the second class position and be regulated in such a way that they do not offend e-bike riders? E-bikes just might have the potential to end auto production in the US. things are quickly changing.

  39. Bikes vs bikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I rode bicycles as my only means of transit for years. Beating the bus on a 15-mile commute to work was a goddamn badge of honor for a long time (sure, a straight shot with no stops pretty much guarantees you'll get there faster than the bus, but thinking about the number of people who'd bike anywhere in Texas in July adds something to it. There's a metal band called Texas in July 'cause that's brutal enough).

    There's just no reason to get an electric bike right now.
    They're a shitty medium between a bicycle and a motorcycle.

    Here's what electric bikes cost:
    http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/bikes/collections/electric-bikes/c/B507

    3k-ish new. Trek is a good brand. My workhorse was a Trek. Other brands have about the same pricing for electric bikes.

    And motorcycles:
    http://powersports.honda.com/street/cruiser/shadow-line.aspx

    The honda shadow is the workhorse of motorcycles. It has a reputation for requiring about as much maintenance as an anvil. 7k. This is brand new. I bough a used '03 shadow in november '15 for 2.2k. So far I've changed the oil. No idea what the used electric bike market looks like so I can't compare there. TBH I didn't bother to look into it.

    So a motorcycle is 3k more.

    It's also a viable vehicle.
    It goes as much distance in a trip as you care to make it (My shadow takes a ~$5 fill up for ~100 miles)
    It goes as fast as you want it to (speedo goes to 100, so does the bike. not that I'd know.... )

    An e-bike is capped to 20mph in most states. My all time high on a bicycle's 38. 20mph is a decent cruising speed on a regular bike if you're in shape (if not, you'll get there). On an e-bike you probably won't ever beat that 20 thanks to the weight of the battery and shit, and you never get the satisfaction of muscle over machine. Be that as it may, you still get all the "oh it's 15 miles away? I'll be there in an hour" of not having a car.

    An e-bike is a shitty medium between a bicycle and a motorcycle.

    Do yourself a favor. Get a $200 bicycle on craigslist, a class M, and a Shadow, Virago, or another 750cc starter bike (also on craigslist).
    All told you can get it done at 4K, and that's a liberal guess (really it's more like 2.2k for my bike, then 250 for the class m, then buy a jacket and helmet so as to not be that asshole on a ninja with sandals and a t-shirt and a backwards baseball cap). That's less than half the price of a reliable 10-year car and you're not getting the worst of both worlds like you would with an "e-bike".

    Do yourself another one. Man up (or lady appropriate term) and push a bicycle with some fuckin muscle, don't get some half-ass excuse for a motorcycle that's also a half-ass excuse for a bike thanks to some extra weight.

  40. e-bikes vs. pedelecs by jjohn_h · · Score: 1

    The Germans are ahead in the curve. They have e-bikes and pedelecs. Pedelecs do have a battery which is only engaged and helpful if you push yourself on the pedals. Pedelecs wastly outnumber e-bikes. Max. speed 25 kmph is rarely attained.

  41. Grammar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only one sentence in this post without a grammatical error

  42. Electric scooters/"bicycles" in China by Zanadou · · Score: 1

    I actually first noticed this yeas ago when I was in Shenzhen: electric scooters/"bicycles" were everywhere. So much for thinking that China is unwilling to limit its pollution.

    Further reading about the power charging infrastructure (or, lack thereof): http://designmind.frogdesign.com/2014/01/chinas-electric-bike-charging-cultures

    1. Re:Electric scooters/"bicycles" in China by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I actually first noticed this yeas ago when I was in Shenzhen: electric scooters/"bicycles" were everywhere. So much for thinking that China is unwilling to limit its pollution.

      They're not using electric bicycles because they are trying to limit pollution. They're using electric bicycles because they are the cheapest thing around. If you are nice to them and keep them on flat ground and don't expect them to do all the work they will last a long time and require less maintenance than a scooter, no fuel, etc. People can't afford anything else because growth is slowing before China became fully industrialized because economies are cooling all over the world and nobody can afford to buy enough of their shit for them to keep going.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Electric scooters/"bicycles" in China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahahaha, that must be why they are the biggest car market in the world, and getting bigger every year.

    3. Re:Electric scooters/"bicycles" in China by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Hahahaha, that must be why they are the biggest car market in the world, and getting bigger every year.

      Hahahaha, that's why every automaker in the world expects sales to drop off sharply in the next year. They're still investing in China because that's what you do when you have money in the bank, and every country is going to see sales falling soon. Guess you don't watch Autoline.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  43. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by Malc · · Score: 1

    Those kinds of speeds overlap with low end mopeds and motorcycles, which require compulsory basic training and a provisional driver's license, and motor insurance.

  44. Sigh by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    "However, e-bikes have been banned in some U.S. cities because of safety concerns."

    I guess they prefer Harleys, where one of them accelerating at night wakes up 2500 people up.

  45. eBike? by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    The ones they use in China look more like light motorcycles than what Americans might think of as an e-Bike. It isn't a regular street bicycle with a motor strapped on the frame, it's a motorcycle frame with an electric engine.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  46. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    E-bikes that can exceed 20 mph need to be limited to cyclists who can pass a motorcycle license exam.

    They already are, in California. Although, frankly, 20 MPH is not that fast. A decent cyclist can exceed that already, especially on a downhill obviously but a fairly fit person can hit 25 MPH on flat ground and they're pedaling which affects balance. That's why California law no longer requires moped registration for motorized bicycles, like it used to.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  47. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    They aren't really designed as motorcycle replacements, they are just ordinary bikes with electric assist. Speed is controlled by pedalling, which is made almost effortless by the electric motor.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  48. Re:US NEXT? HAHAHAHAHHA by zedaroca · · Score: 1

    Three thousand to six thousand bucks for a fucking bicycle?

    I know that these bikes exist and you are not exaggerating, but that's not the price they are paying on these bikes.
    Taobao is a Chinese eBay, here is a search for electric bycicles. Have a look on what they have for less than 300USD (~2000CNY).
    More than a grand really is fucking ridiculous, common Chinese people would not afford it. The problem in the US is that these bikes are being targeted at smugs. Sell bikes for $150 and decent scooters for $300 like in China and you'll see a lot of people buying just to give it a try.

  49. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

    Telecommuting is far and away the safest option, and best for the environment (unless, like me, you telecommute to a city 1000 miles away, then you end up on an airplane every month or so - not so great for the environment, but still safer than a daily 20 mile drive.)

    If you're going to take your e-bike up to 35mph, just call it what it is: an underpowered motorcycle, and wear a real helmet and some protective clothes, or not, it's your brain to risk splattering on the pavement if you wish.

  50. Re: so fast by rwa2 · · Score: 1

    It's happening... Yes, the laws are a bit funky, but reasonable for little motor vehicles that you can't ride on non-motorized bike trails (though people do anyway and I haven't seen anyone complain) but aren't quite full motorcycles (but can almost be used that way).

    I'm starting to see a fair number of these tooling around: http://www.radpowerbikes.com/p... (granted, I live near Seattle where they're based) and they're pretty much the sweet spot. I'd get one if I didn't live near at the confluence of so many non-motorized bike trails (all of the old rail and trolley trails are being converted to bike trails in all of the major metro areas I've ever lived).

    In other areas and downtown Seattle, these things are popping up more often, though. Lots of couriers use them to make deliveries on downtown bike lanes, weaving comfortably through the gridlocked traffic and purring up and down the hills. It's also big enough to take an adult passenger, and I've seen a woman take a bike like this to the library with 3 toddlers in childseats.

    750W (1HP) is the limit for these electric assist motors in most states, (WA actually allows 1kW before classifying it as a motorcycle). There's also a grey area where the motor assist should be limited to 20mph, but it's fine if you push it faster by pedaling/going downhill. These kind of motor systems can be bought direct from China for under $300 ... and then another $300 for a pack of Li-Po batteries, so you could convert any sturdy bike into your own pedelec. The best hack I've seen involved building a bike battery pack out of ~$100 of surplus laptop battery packs from ebay.

    I'm glad this is taking off, I've always dreamed of building a little 3-wheel velomobile as a kid, and all this stuff is going to make it much more affordable. We already use our cheap normal utility bikes as a second car, and it would be neat to have some electric options in the fleet for certain errands or to entertain visitors.

  51. cyclist = invisible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even big motorcycles are hard to see, nevermind a skinny little bike.

    You aren't looking around enough.

    I'm looking around just fine, it's the left-hand side of the Bell curve that's the problem. I commute via bicycle three days a week, by motorcycle two, and also own a car. In the winter (Jan-Mar) I usually take public transit. I'm fairly transportation agnostic.

    The general advice to new motorcyclists is "assume that you are invisible". This goes to cyclists as well.

  52. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

    It is true that e-bikes are not designed as motorcycle replacements.

    The rest of parent post is so wrong it is evident that the poster has no experience with e-bikes and has done no serious reading about their design, capabilities, and uses.

  53. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

    Yes, a good cyclist in training can easily pedal faster than 20 mph under many conditions, and racing cyclists often exceed 35 mph especially when working in a peloton.

    But by the time a cyclist has reached the ability to pedal faster than 19 mph on the flat, he has gained enough experience, and probably enough judgment, to not be a threat to himself or others. E-bike riders, though, take a shortcut to speed and can get up to very risky speeds before they have the experience or judgment to know how to handle themselves. E-bikes are okay, but new e-bike riders need to be told that they are a danger to themselves and others until they have acquired bicycling experience.

  54. Even empty bike lanes mess up traffic flow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fanatical cyclists do not seem to understand that the bike paths themselves are a problem. Here in Austin one of the local TV stations did a very nice presentation with good graphics on how the bike lanes choked down the width of vehicle traffic lanes. Even when there are no bikes present! The result is that public buses and parked cars get their side mirrors and Wi-Fi antennas clipped. Replacing a side mirror on a bus is expensive, not that

    the side mirror on a vehicle is cheap. The smaller, tighter lanes squeeze wider vehicles over the center line in residential areas. I know that cyclist do not care about this sort of thing, after all, they are far more important, say, garbage trucks, delivery vehicles etc.

    In certain parts of the US, such as Austin, Texas, there are long periods where the weather is "flash flooding" or the temperatures are well over 25C. This does not happen very often in northern Europe.

  55. Not a chance "only fat people" ride electric bikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here in North America, bicycle culture looks down on those who ride electric bicycles and they're typically only ridden by overweight or elderly people who need extra help. An electric motor makes you look sort of pathetic and often times will result in you being talked down to by other cyclists, pedestrians, and cars.

    "Hey fat ass, try eating less and riding a real bicycle"

    Also almost everyone who rides a bike here does so because of "moral reason x" or to get exercise-- these bikes appeal to neither. The only reason sales have been so high in China, is as everyone else says because "the fucking ban on motorcycles."

    Don't post ads like this to Slashdot and call it news, this is fucking SPAM.

  56. Re:A few changes and the Chinese eBikes would be O by ukoda · · Score: 1

    No, none of that is required here, just a car license. The actual requirements will vary from country to country. If you want to be pedantic you could argue that all those requirements should apply to bicycles.

  57. Two common mistakes in posts here by ukoda · · Score: 1

    Firstly the laws around bicycles and ebike are not the same in every country, state and city. Just because the law where you are restricts you in some way that does not make it true for people living elsewhere. The legal/practical viability of ebikes is going to vary from place to place.

    Secondly many posters are thinking of ebikes as only bicycles with a small motor added, which is the most common type in Western cities but most ebikes in China, which the original article refers to, do not have peddles, they are scooter styled. If you saw one in a western city you would likely assume that it was a gas power Vespa or similar, not an ebike. The reason the scooter format is more common that the bicycle style is the load carrying capacity, you can put you shopping on the deck in front of the seat and more in the compartment under the seat. Of course the load carrying capabilities do get a abused in China. Often saw four people on one and loads that were oversized. Watched one girl transporting a wardrobe fall off when the wardrobe, laid horizontally over the desk, dug into the ground on a corner.

  58. something you said just inspired me... by 74Carlton · · Score: 1

    "e-bike riders only risk their own lives"

    I'd like to apply this to the driver's seat in all automobiles. Namely, remove all the driver seat air bags, and replace them with a gun that automatically shoots the driver in the event of an accident. I think we would see much safer driving.

    Yes, I am a grumpy old cyclist. And by the way, I do pull over and let cars and trucks pass when I need to, did it three or four times today.