micromobility - Ebikes, scooters, longboards: Whatever floats your goat, this is micromobility
Ebikes, bicycles, scooters, skateboards, longboards, eboards, motorcycles, skates, unicycles: Whatever floats your goat, this is all things micromobility!
"Transportation using lightweight vehicles such as bicycles or scooters, especially electric ones that may be borrowed as part of a self-service rental program in which people rent vehicles for short-term use within a town or city.
micromobility is seen as a potential solution to moving people more efficiently around cities"
Feel free to also check out
It's a little sad that we need to actually say this, but:
Don't be an asshole or you will be permanently banned.
Respectful debate is totally OK, criticizing a product is fine, but being verbally abusive will not be tolerated.
Focus on discussing the idea, not attacking the person.
view the rest of the comments
Right, the entire point of an ebike is that you ride it like a bicycle, not a motorcycle, so that it can safely interact with pedestrians like a bicycle, not a motorcycle. A vehicle with the performance characteristics of a moped is not safe around pedestrians.
On my bike when I want to go faster I pedal harder. I legitimately do not even understand how throttle alone can be faster than assist unless it is being used to start a bike which is too heavy to start otherwise.
Pedalling through an intersection or through a turn or while doing hand signals (not both hands on the handlebars) is dangerous when in traffic. The throttle allows you to focus on your surroundings and still accelerate when in tight situations such as a busy intersection with cars around.
The throttle doesn't get you to go faster than pedalling with assist - the throttle cuts out at 20mph. Pedalling with assist is what brings you to top speed. High top speed is what's dangerous around pedestrians. Getting rid of the throttle won't make the bike safer around pedestrians.
The throttle is NOT for faster, it's for finesse and for speed maintenance. It's for being precise and technical in close quarters around cars. It's for boosting up a particularly steep hill so you don't slow down near hilltops when there are cars around that can't see over that hill.
Not having a throttle makes these bikes much more dangerous.
That's because it very much isn't. The throttle is for high torque situations, and cuts off at high rpm (as it should to not give the bike a moped's characteristics so the bike stays safe around pedestrians).
I'm sorry I have been riding bicycles and now ebikes for 30 years, with 20 years of urban commuting, and none of this makes sense to me. By this description a throttle seems worse for ergonomics because it requires you to keep your hand in a single spot. Hand placement is an important part of balance and riding dynamics. I can lane split just fine with pedals and I would argue that if you cannot then you are riding beyond your skill, which is a major issue with throttle bikes.
Again, unless you are riding a moped which is significantly heavier than a bike so the riding dynamics are more like a moped. Which is the thing we are specifically trying to prevent.
I read about this thing and expected the exact discussion taking place here. Even though we have bicycles that have much smaller assistance engines than the US has on their bikes/mopeds, we somehow manage to navigate traffic just fine.
There's probably some kind of explanation, I don't know what it is.
Ergonomically, my bike makes it very easy to operate both the throttle and brakes with my hands balanced on the handlebar. I'd hope that's true for all bikes, since you don't want braking to fuck up your ability to maintain balance. Bikes are designed such that you can use the handlebars and finger-accessible controls simultaneously,
Foot position and pedal rotation is ALSO an important part if balance and riding dynamics, especially when turning through intersections at 20 mph. Instead of managing gyroscopic forces and compensating my balance, the throttle means I can lock my feet in place, stand up, look around, get better visibility, and be in better control with better awareness in high-traffic areas. All of these things make me safer, and keeps me aware of e.g. pedestrians who this bill supposedly benefits.
I am not familiar with urban commuting, as I've never lived in an urban area, so I can't comment on that specifically. I regularly cross busy 2-3 lane highways with 55 or 65 mph speed limits, with sometimes only a stop sign to help me do so. There are two big ones that I cross in each direction of my commute, or four per day. Depending on where I'm going and the weather, I take different crossings with different risk levels. In fact, 80% of my commute is along roads with 55+ mph speed limits; many of those roads include sections with steep, hilly terrain. Having a throttle to go from a standstill and quickly cross gaps in traffic, or to keep my speed up when fast-moving cars have low visibility in the hills, is a huge safety boon in my commute. It keeps me and those around me safer.
Ok, then you want a moped. And that's fine. But you need to understand why there are many people who want to preserve the distinction here for some very real reasons, largely involving how dangerous these vehicles have become in densly populated areas. Nobody is saying you can't have a throttle driven moped. You just cannot also have all the privileges of a bicycle at the same time.
Ok, but a class 3 ebike doesn't have the characteristic or riding dynamics of a motorcycle, which is what you used above to define a moped.
I don't want a moped because I don't want to register/license/insure it, because I much prefer the exercise and riding dynamics of an ebike, and because they are too fast and dangerous to be used as casually as I use my bike.