The Tualatin Police Department says a 15-year old Tigard High School sophomore died while riding an “e-bike” early Wednesday morning. According to TPD it happened on SW 124th Avenue near SW Myslony Street, an industrial area just north of Tualatin-Sherwood Road about 20 miles southwest of Portland. The boy’s name was Mikah Cavalcanti-Chun.
I wouldn’t typically cover a crash like this given how far it is from Portland and other circumstances, but I’ve decided to take a closer look because of how this is being incorrectly reported by the police and local media — and how this death is already sparking conversations about the safety of battery-assisted bicycles.
According to TPD, the bike rider was found dead by a passerby and police don’t believe any other road user was involved. Police say they found, “an adult male laying on the ground near a tree, with an e-bike nearby.” A cursory investigation at the scene leads TPD to believe the rider, who they refer to as an “e-bicyclist”, “may have lost control of the e-bike, which led to him hitting the curb and then a tree.” A reporter for KGW (NBC in Portland) said he spoke to TPD officers who said the teenager, “hit some debris in the bike lane” prior to losing control and colliding with a tree.
There aren’t many other details available yet beyond what I’ve shared above.
It’s notable however, that the police are calling this an “e-bike” and the rider an “e-bicyclist” who “lost control” while also stating in their press release that, “e-bikes are capable of traveling at speeds up to 35 mph.” If police are implying that the vehicle this young man used was capable of going 35 mph, it should not be referred to as an “e-bike.” At those speeds, it’s much more accurate to say he was riding some sort of e-moped or e-motorcycle.
Oregon law defines an “electric assisted bicycle” as being, “incapable of propelling the vehicle at a speed of greater than 20 miles per hour.” According to the Oregon Department of Motor Vehicles, even a “moped” has a maximum capable speed of only 30 mph. By saying this teen was an “e-bicyclist” on an “e-bike,” police and media create confusion and a misleading and inaccurate narrative that can have real consequences for legal e-bike riders.
On January 1, 2025, Oregon will adopt the three class system of e-bike definitions which will add a 28 mph max (without throttle) class of e-bikes to state law. That new law came about only after a teen was killed by the driver of a minivan as the teen biked across a street in Bend last summer.
We saw how that tragedy in Bend sparked responses based on paternalistic impulses, ignorance of e-bike technology and bicycle law, and a tendency to blame victims. To be clear, there’s a wide chasm in performance, safety risks, and ride characteristics between the e-bike I can buy at the bike shop in my neighborhood and the 35-mph+, mostly throttle-powered, fast electric mopeds and motorcycles available online and in other retailers that we often see law enforcement agencies and the media confuse with “bikes.”
I’ve reached out to TPD to clarify what type of vehicle was being used in this crash. I’ll update this post when I hear back.
UPDATE, 10:20 am: I have just confirmed with TPD that the teen was riding an Amyet S8. On the seller’s website, it’s advertised as an “electric bike” having a top speed of 35 mph and it comes with a dual-battery, 2000W motor — twice the legal size of an e-bike. Regardless of what the company or the police say, this is not an “e-bike” according to Oregon law. I acknowledge the law isn’t keeping up with these products, but I think calling this person’s vehicle an “e-bike” and referring to him as a “bicyclist” in any form is misleading and risks creating a backlash against legal electric bikes.
In fact, according to this handy guide created by Oregon DMV (see below), this product might not even fall into the e-moped or e-motorcycle category given its speed and the requirement to have a license and registration. The fact is, products like this do not meet any federal safety guidelines and are likely not allowed on any road under Oregon law. That’s why when police mislabel it and the local news shows b-roll of bicycles and calls it an “e-bike” we are doing a disservice to legal riders and threatening their rights to the road.
UPDATE, 2:45 pm: Nonprofit transportation advocacy group The Street Trust has issued a statement to news editors and reporters in order to inform them that the vehicle involved in Wednesday morning’s tragedy was not an “e-bike.” Here’s an excerpt from the email just sent by The Street Trust Executive Director Sarah Iannarone:
It’s important to note that the vehicle involved in this crash was capable of 35 mph. Oregon law currently limits e-bikes to 20 mph. Mopeds are allowed to travel 30 mph. The vehicle involved is legally classified as a motorcycle. Referring to it as a standard e-bike leads to confusion and unfairly stigmatizes legal e-bikes, which are designed for lower speeds with safety in mind. This tragedy underscores the dangers of illegally modified and out-of-class vehicles on our streets and the unbearably high costs paid in human lives when we fail to implement sensible regulations, educate our young people and families, and build forgiving infrastructure.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Most of the “fat tire throttle assisted” ebikes I see around town are the Rad Powerbikes RadRunner that top out at at 20 mph, maybe 24 mph going downhill. Less common are the Onyx electric mopeds that require plates and insurance but those cost $3700 so not that many working class people can afford those. Please learn the difference and stop fueling the “fat tire equals bad” fire.
Fair point! What you describe was absolutely not my intention but I can see how it could be interpreted that way. I’ll consider an edit. I was just trying to create the picture of a more powerful type of bike, not throwing shade at all fat tired rigs.
I see far more generic throttled fat-tire ebikes that are available online for $500-700 with dual 1000 watt engines that can easily go 35 mph. Why would the average person spend $1300 on a radrunner when they could buy a $550 dual 1000 watt engine e-bike?
One of many, many examples:
https://www.amazon.com/Ridstar-Electric-Motorcycles-Bicicleta-electrica/dp/B0CBMP99MW
I’m completely fine with sharing bike infrastructure with these high power e-bikes and believe it is 100% inevitable that 35+ mph e-bikes become some of the most widely used bikes in the USA (regardless of the law).
I’m less stoked to share infrastucture with these bikes. Just last night running home from Powell Butte a guy came *screaming* past me on the Springwater. Well above 20mph, guessing 30 plus. An entirely unsafe speed for the Springwater and many of the trail users I more commonly share the trail with. He was followed by two assholes on actual gas powered scooters. Frustrating run home on the trail for sure! People wanna buy these things? Sure, whatever, knock yourself out, they’re dumb as hell but so many things in this world are. But you can’t continue to share bike lanes and trails with me any longer. Your ass is on a street and in the auto lane.
Considering that 28 mph bikes are already legal and the fact that very few people will ride them at 35+ I think the angst over these bikes is just a reaction to “something new in my bike lane” conservatism.
28 mph bikes are not yet legal here as “ebikes”, but when they are I don’t think they will be legally allowed in a bike lane (or MUP etc.) when they exceed 20.
28 mph e-bike are legally sold in Oregon but you are correct that they are not legally bicycles which is exactly my point.
But they will be legal beginning January 1st. HB4103 amends ORS 801.258 to include 28mph Class 3 e-bikes.
Well the 20 mph vs 28 vs 35 mph is generally just a software setting you can set on the bike anyway so it’s pretty meaningless in terms of sales and plus your allowed to sell off-road only vehicles anyway.
Oregon rules, IIRC, say that Class 3 e-bikes are not allowed on paths, only roads. Running on paths, with or without my dog, is a completely different situation with Class 1 vs Class 3 (possibly hacked) or One-wheels.
Portland “rules” say that e-bikes are not allowed on parks mups:
https://www.portland.gov/code/20/12/170
Not that I care…laws are made to be broken!
I agree! If it feels good, do it! ANYTHING GOES!
I’m reading that city code differently than you are. It says:
“The prohibitions of this Section do not apply to … the following electric mobility devices… 1. “Electric assisted bicycle” as defined in ORS 801.258;
So that appears to exempt ebikes from the law prohibiting use in parks.
Oh and this^^
Not allowed in parks except on roadways, however allowed on MUPs in the state of Oregon including Portland. So Park space is different than a general MUP. E Bikes are allowed on MUPs in Oregon however there has been talk of changing that.
+1 like I’m going to risk getting hit by a car on my ebike vs risk seeing a cop try to catch me lol.
People going 28mph on MUPs is not normal and should not be normalized.
Did I say this? (No I did not.)
In fact, my entire point is that the vast, vast majority of people with class 3 e-bikes don’t bike at 28 mph on MUPS.
Why would they use MUPs? MUPs were always designed for recreation – they go from nowhere to nowhere – they are designed specifically for recreation. E-bike users are trying to get somewhere, to replace car trips, so they use city stroads and collectors. Even in this case, the end user was trying to get to school.
It’s clear that you don’t live in Portland anymore, David.
Why wouldn’t they use MUPs? Not everybody is a bike pervert that has a bike for every different situation they may find themselves in. I would ride a class 3 e-bike on MUPs if I had one, it’s the exact same experience as if I was on a pedal bike on MUPs. Your assertion that “E-bike users are trying to get somewhere” is nonsense, it’s a baseless generalization that is obviously wrong if you’ve spent more than a few hours out on the road or paths.
Oh man, I think I might be a bike pervert. Do I have to register somewhere?
I hope not, or I might be in trouble too.
Hopefully that was taken the way it was intended – poking a little fun at people (including me) who once we get into bikes, it’s hard to resist collecting them. I just don’t think that’s the “usual” thing. More an enthusiast thing.
Years of looking at a MUP bike commuters from my window, years of being passed by bike commuters when I’m using on the MUP, and years of reading comments here from bike commuters tell me otherwise.
Either that or the same people I see riding M-F (not weekends) going north in the morning and coming back south in the evening are all doing 9-hour weekday recreational rides.
The Springwater would like a word
Would you give a RadRunner to your teenager to ride around in traffic?
No because they are too slow and have bad brakes. Need a bike that can do at least 35+ mph imho to be safer in traffic by keeping up with the flow and not risking rear-ending.
I see people going much faster than 25 on e bikes all the time. Most of them aren’t pedaling at all.
At 20+ mph, pedaling is providing a trivial contribution to the propulsion. The pedal motion is just there to operate as a throttle where a twist or button option isn’t available.
Most cyclists can reach 20 mph with no motor at all, though they might be tiring themselves out on flat terrain. The pros who do the Tour De France can hit 25 mph as their average over the whole race. The balance between how much torque comes from your body vs. the motor is entirely determined by what level of assist the cyclist willfully selects.
For an untrained cyclist 20 mph is pretty fast. It takes a strong rider to average 20 mph on an open course with urban traffic conflicts and control devices.
Cheap vehicles capable of 35 MPH are being marketed as e-bikes, and legal definitions aside, certainly look like e-bikes. If you saw someone riding one of these, it would be hard to criticize you for calling it an e-bike:
https://www.amazon.com/Ridstar-Electric-Motorcycles-Bicicleta-electrica/dp/B0CBMP99MW (or https://www.amazon.com/GAMVIRE-Electric-Hydraulic-Mountain-Commuter/dp/B0CM944WG6 and dozens of others)
The lines have become very, very blurry.
Yes. All the more reason for caution when making statements about cases like this. And police have even great expectations given their very serious role in setting the tone and narrative following crashes.
Yes, but if I was a cop who is supposed to know the law and what this is, and talking to the news, I would use the right terminology, not spread misinformation.
Scratch that, if I was a cop I would probably be spreading misinformation.
Think about how many rules and definitions a general-duty officer/deputy has to remember, along with his/her agency priorities for enforcement. Yet, we expect them to remember the somewhat triviality that there are 3 classes of e-bike, and then there are e-motorcycles and e-mopeds. It’s not easy for experienced bike professionals to discern whether it’s a Class 3, a 1/2/3 that’s been hacked, or a Moped unless they look up a manufacturer spec.
I have been involved in writing OAR rules in another subject area and one thing our law enforcement friends remind us of is “enforcability.” An officer can’t easily tell what Class of e-bike, a hacked e-bike, or if it’s a “moped” that has a decal that says, “Brand X e-bike” on it. In the moment, they see pedals, chain/belt drive, battery, derailleur and “if it looks like an e-bike…”
Officers I’ve spoken with say the e-bike rules are somewhat unenforcible, because at a specific point in time, while witnessing a given event, they can’t tell what the (perceived) e-bike is, and relatively quickly discern if there is a violation. The easy hacks provided by some brands (Super73) make it even harder. Public Information Officers have it even worse because they have to take the technical stuff and make it “public friendly.” A person riding a hacked Class 3 Super73, would make no sense to the general public.
Finally, we have the public expectation for news NOW. So the PIO has to issue a statement, before someone can visit websites and discern what, exactly, the deceased was riding.
Comment of the week, that is.
… forgot to nest this comment under Laura’s response immediately above, which is my nomination for comment of the week. Trenchant, insightful, and well-reasoned.
TLDR; Expecting police officers to have a basic understanding of the laws they enforce is unreasonable, so it’s cool if they make stuff up.
Exactly.
What, precisely, are they doing if they don’t know what the laws are? Just arresting people or writing citations on gut feel? They have to know the law to know what to enforce.
I don’t think that’s a fair summary of a carefully written comment.
Over the years police and the PIO have consistently misinformed the public on a number of items, usually in line with their biases. Language related to bikes and vulnerable road users has been abysmal. It is not too much to ask them to use correct terminology or at least, if they are unsure, not use incorrect terminology. The Amyet S8 does not look like a bicycle enough to trick someone into thinking it is a standard e-bike. They could have said motorized vehicle if they didn’t know what to call it. But, honestly, most of them don’t care, which is why articles like this have to be written.
Do they need to have that chart memorized? No.
Is it too much to ask them to make an effort to communicate accurately and understand the impact of their words? Also- No.
Was this an honest mistake? Probably.
Should they learn from it? Yes.
On top of this, many of us have had police make up laws that don’t exist to harass us when we are riding bicycles. So, yeah. Cops need to know what the laws are. If they don’t, they should take a minute to be professionals and look it up or ask somone else.
In my experience your statements are substantially correct. The point of my reply was that your “TLDR” rather twisted Laura’s comment.
The critical parts of an e-bike are in a black box and at a small distance one looks a lot like another. How does a police officer know what a passing rider has done to their controller?
Do you even have to ‘hack’ them? the ebikes I have just have mode settings and you can just set the mph cut off and make it different for each mode and even have an offroad mode.
Nothing in the law seems to say you can’t use the same bike on your own private property in a 35+ mph mode.
“if I was a cop I would probably be spreading misinformation”
Yes, you probably would.
Well and plus the 20 mph, or 28 mph etc. limits are just setting on the bike generally which can be changed. The three e bikes I’ve bought even come with offroad modes already programmed in for using on your own property etc. It’s trivial to change them and you can even do it on the fly.
The implication of the article is that paternalistic behavior regarding children is a bad thing. There is really not enough known about this crash to report on other than a tragedy has occurred resulting in the loss of life of a 15 year old boy.
Hi Granpa, I’ve been around long enough to know what happens. The paternalism has real impacts on cycling policy and it never remains solely on once incident. I am already seeing all the comments on this article on other platforms where people are saying how dangers “e-bikes” are for kids. Also, I have confirmed with TPD that the teen was riding a product that is not an e-bike as defined by Oregon law and is technically closer to a moped or a motorcycle IMO.
Of course the desire to protect children is good. But your comment lays out why it can be a problem.
You’re right that there’s really little known about this crash beyond the boy’s death, because there’ve been no witness accounts or videos.
Yet paternalism kicks in, and the focus goes straight to protecting children from bikes/motorcycles/whatever than can go fast. It could be he did lose control because it allowed him to go faster than he could safely go. BUT, it could be he swerved because a drunk or texting driver forced him off the road.
And it may be that a teenager on that vehicle IS likely to be less likely to be able to remain in control than an adult, especially, say, an experienced motorcycle rider. BUT, it could be the boy’s been riding gas dirt bikes for ten years, and IS experienced.
Paternalism could cloud investigators’ views in regard to both of those..
The police report is also telling. It’s certainly not accurate–it calls him an “adult” which isn’t true by any normal definition, legal or otherwise. It says “police don’t believe any other road user was involved”. Why do they believe that? Did the fact they found a dead boy there instead of an adult make assumption more likely than if they’d found an adult? It’s certainly possible, and also possible that seeing the teenage victim with a powerful motorized bike prodded paternalistic feelings to kick in.
I knew a psychiatrist who used to review medical malpractice suits to determine whether doctors’ predispositions (such as paternalism) contributed to mistakes, and it was common, but barely ever recognized or even considered. I think paternalism (especially because it’s viewed as a good thing, and often is) certainly can have negative consequences in situations like this one.
The only time a human being should travel faster than 20 mph on a hard flat surface is during a race, on a bus, or in a train.
+1 motocross for the win 😛
I was once of the opinion that the older term “moped” [motor + pedaller] was out of date given that most moped like scooters (<=50cc, once made by Puch, Velosolex) had disappeared …evolved and lost their pedal function for forward movement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moped
BUT now more than ever we [transportation industry / policy makers / traffic safety officers / sales staff] need to bring back this classification of motor vehicles with pedals for regulatory oversight and enforcement actions to fill that technology gap between ebikes and motorcycles (>51cc).
The ab-so-lute horror of more people switching from the bloody car to e-bikes…
Most are switching from standard bikes or public transit. The emergence of “e-bikes” have not increased our cycling modal share or reduced motor vehicle traffic in Portland.
I think the vast majority of people already riding bikes switch to pedalec e-bikes. These higher-powered throttled e-bikes appeal to non-riders, ATMO.
If they are riding on crowded, narrow infrastructure that isn’t sized or engineered for higher speeds, you’re damn right it’s a problem. E bikes doing 20 on multi use paths are great. E motorcycles doing 30+ on roadways are great. But the motorcycles need to stay on the roads.
Considering that it’s already 100% illegal to ride e-bikes on multi-use paths, I can assure you that we will be seeing more of these bikes on MUPS. This whole situation is akin to the angst, wailing, finger-pointing, and gnashing of teeth when rental E-scooters were introduced.
And kids dying. Don’t forget that part.
If kids dying from traffic violence were considered to be a problem in this society, far more kids would be walking or riding for transportation.
Yes agreed, this is a “national” (and “international”) problem…Honolulu, Amsterdam, etc. are being flooded by this type of vehicle and often being bought by parents for tween / teen use with less understanding of the risk vs if it were a moped / light motorcycle.
For example, in Honolulu the press coverage of crashes and injuries / fatalities for youth are similarly mis-described due to ignorance of this vehicle class often starting with the police crash report.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, and I don’t mean the tragedy of a child’s death.
A lot of work has been put into normalizing e-bikes as a Utopian alternative to automobility. I’m sure that the same magical thinking applied when horses were replaced by cars.
Somehow people just can’t see the crass, commercial motivation that inevitably drags everything down to the lowest common denominator. This illegal vehicle is the product of that cycle and has taken a life.
Is that photo correct in that helmets are NOT required on e-bikes but required for 16 and under on normal bikes? Caught my eye…
The minimum age to use an e-bike is 16, so the helmet law just wouldn’t apply, since it only applies to under 16 kids.
I think this is a more important aspect of the story. If true, it could easily have contributed to the kid’s death more than speed alone. Maintenance of our cycling infrastructure including sweeping needs to be a higher priority.
There are more things to pay attention to as a cyclist who wants to make it to the next screen, especially as we get into the darker time of the year. Not only do we have to pay attention to the traffic around us, and drivers who aren’t paying attention to us, but we also have to keep an eye on the road right in front of us to make sure we aren’t thrown off balance by debris or uneven pavement in our path. Wet leaves, traction gravel, car parts, twigs and branches, garbage, broken glass, manhole covers, unevenly patched utility trenches, or yard debris cans blown into the middle of the road which caused me to take a tumble and break my bike last December…
Our transportation departments need to step it up on infrastructure maintenance to ensure safe transit.
Debris in the bike line is a much bigger hazard when you are going fast. We will probably never know the speed at the time of the incident, but I think it’s safe to assume that they were going faster on the e-bike than they would have been going on a standard bicycle.
The issue I personally have with e-bikes and kids is that it gets them going at “expert” cyclist speeds before they are ready. I grew up in SW Portland and rode a lot at this same age. I didn’t start riding fast until I hit college age and got a faster road bike for commuting. I now own two e-bikes, but I know the hazards very well at this point. Debris, intersections, right/left crosses, etc. Giving a teenager 28mph capability is a very bad idea.
Some places in Portland have their issues, but overall this is a crazy easy town to ride.
Riding/driving for conditions is a fundamental responsibility for being on the road. There are a few spots with issues, but anyone who blames the road and others for garden variety conditions doesn’t know what their real problem is.
I’m happy to hear that the places you ride don’t have any issues, but those of us who ride a variety of paths around town and are 4-season commuters know the truth.
What is “their real problem”?
I hope the police/DA press charges against all the people who put this weapon into Mikah’s hands and under his feet. So irresponsible.
This should also apply equally to three and four wheeled vehicles, unicycles, etc.
I will loudly applaud when all objects with wheels powered by motors or engines have speed limiters, with special stringency on people under 25.
So many irresponsible parties here…
1) the company for making this garbage
2) the government for failing to regulate it
3) the person(s) who bought it, perhaps without regard for lethality
4) the person(s) who gave it to Mikah
5) Mikah for riding it too fast for whatever conditions were present.
I have almost died on a motorcycle, driving a car, etc,
I sure could have used a speed limiter on many occasions…
First off, to want to press charges against the parents or blame Mikah himself is completely insensitive and doesn’t address the root problem. This whole article can be argued as insensitive but that is besides the point because conversations like these are necessary. Secondly, I will refer to the vehicle he was riding as an e-bike. I don’t care what you want to call but this is what I will be referring it as.
Points 1 and 2 are valid but 3-4 less so and 5 is wrong.
THE SELLER/BUYER
The bike was used and currently there is much less government regulation on used items sold on ebay or craigslist as there is directly from the manufacturer. You cant blame the seller either because they might have only done the dealings with Mikah’s parents so they did not feel the need to emphasize the risk it posed (if he himself even knew).
Do you expect a person selling you a car to tell you It is one of the leading causes of death in the United States? Should they tell you that the chance that you die in the vehicle is higher than the chance that you die of every single disease other than Cancer and heart disease? No. If a e bike seller should be required to emphasize the danger the bike poses to the user then a car seller should have to emphasize it 5 times more.
PERSON WHO GAVE IT TO MIKAH
15 or 16 (the age that the average American gets a license)makes little difference given that he was a Sophomore in high school. If a 16 year old should be allowed to drive a car alone (which they should, for a variety of reasons), a more dangerous act than riding an e-bike/moped/e-motorcycle, then the Parents would have less of a reason to be worried about giving him the bike. As I mentioned previously, the dangers might not have been apparent to the parents, but even if they were, so are the dangers for driving a car. So in the parents eyes the e-bike is a cheaper, greener and equally dangerous option as a car.
MIKAH
Blaming a 15 year old for going fast on his bike and crashing is like blaming a 1st grader for wanting to talk and saying something personal about you. I knew Mikah personally, I rode his bike and saw him ride it himself. I will not disclose any details that the family or police haven’t disclosed already other than the fact that it was used, as I found the detail important. No matter if he was going too fast, or driving distracted or anything, he shouldn’t be blamed. The crash might have been completely due to things he could have controlled but the blame should not be placed on him. He was 15 and I am sure each and every person in this comment section would have done the same at that age. We all do dangerous things but in this case (Unless the accident was caused by another vehicle) he just got unlucky and did the wrong thing at the wrong time.
Please respect the family’s wishes for privacy as while its very easy to come here and talk about the death as you would any other death, just a statistic, the family has just had their 15 year old son die a horrible death while on his way to school due to preventable reasons. Please have some heart.
May Mikah rest in peace.
I’m curious how you (and Alejandro below) can find blame / responsibility in the company that makes these bikes. How? Unless it’s the case that it was dangerously constructed, it’s just a fast e-bike. Not even irresponsibly fast. I’m not defending the company, I’m just wondering what responsibility we think they should have.
You’re curious? So am I!
Earlier you condemned the police for stating in their press release that this was an e-bike (because, if the manufacturer’s promotional materials are to be believed, when new it can go a bit faster than what the legislature defines as an e-bike).
You regard calling this vehicle an e-bike as “spreading misinformation”, yet you continue to deliberately mislead people by repeatedly doing just that throughout this forum. You also said that if you were with the police, you’d be spreading misinformation.
So… are you a cop? A Russian mole stirring the pre-election pot? Or just someone who lacks charity and grace towards others?
Manufacturer should be in charge of assessing the risk a product holds, if risk is sufficient they should maybe require a certification process or license to purchase/operate. Or perhaps even some safety features, cars are safer than they were 40 years ago because of government regulation forcing manufacturers to make cars safer.
That’s some extreme nanny state stuff right there. we’ve had offroad motorcycles for nearly 100 years without requiring licenses and it’s worked just fine imho.
Plenty of dangerous objects, knives, bows and arrows, not to mention guns etc. are all available without license and registration. Seems crazy to pickout ebikes as something that should. Don’t guns kill far more kids?
The USA would be a better society if it were less f**k you I got mine (and roll up and die if you don’t) and more “nanny state” (e.g. a democratic society with a basic social welfare system).
I’m definitely not holding me breath for this to happen.
I’m an old school cyclist who actually raced during the days of wool shorts and jerseys. Back then you learned how to handle your bike in tandem with getting strong enough to go fast enough to keep up with other riders. When triathletes started going on group rides with bike racers in the late 1970s, there were a lot of crashes because the triathletes were strong enough to keep up but didn’t know how to handle their bikes. I see the same thing today with e-bikes. People, and not just kids, get e-bikes that will often go faster than even a good bike racer can go. And they’re often a menace to themselves and others because they don’t know how to handle a bike and are often distracted by other things.
Anther important thing I haven’t seen mentioned is that these vehicles are extremely heavy. When they pass you on a path at these insane speeds, with terrible handling skills and next to no perceptible effort, you can feel how devastating an impact would be. It should be difficult to pedal something so massive and heavy at such high speeds. It’s seriously just some misplaced carbrain shit. I hate it.
Slight sarcasm . . .
It’s almost as if anyone using wheels on the street should have to go through some sort of licensing process to learn rules of the road and pass an in-motion test to be able to use their “vehicle” on the city streets. Semis, delivery vehicles, passenger cars, motorcycles, scooters, e-bikes, bikes, skates, . . . everything with wheels.
No, they are not designed with safety in mind. Ask your favorite bike mechanic (preferably one who doesn’t have any incentive to help you buy one).
I agree. AFAIK there are no ebikes that are designed for safety. Lights and fenders do not make a bike safe, they make a bike practical.
A bike that can go faster 15mph with electric power is not safe. Ebikes does not have a seat belt or air bag or crumple zone or turn signals…
An e-bike could be compared to your other bike on a downhill. Bigger motor/steeper hill. A bike is not inherently safe, the rider’s skill and caution make it so. I have good reason to know this–the Germantown Road incident of 2002, for instance.
Bikes can be more or less well designed, built, and equipped, but having a motor or not is a detail.
What bike has a crumple zone?
Sadly, I am seeing more and more young riders on electric motorcycles (no pedals, designed to look like enduro bikes) using MUPs and bike lanes around the area. When traffic is backed up at lights, they zip through bike lanes and across parks to avoid it. They also travel at significantly higher speeds than e-bikes.
Why is that sad? I think we should encourage more motorcycles, they have smaller environmental footprints. I don’t know what it is now but used to be you could get a motorcycle license at 14 years old.
I’m sorry for Mikah’s family. I know people who’ve given their kids similar rigs. It seems to me that one way public officials could support parents is with clear, informed communication about the capabilities of ‘e-bikes’.
I would pick 350 watts as the assist threshold for requiring a motorcycle operator’s license and a license plate for a new single bike. I’d give it a couple years to take effect so sellers have time to adapt. This rule violates the principle of being easily enforced but it would give a clear guideline for a careful person making a purchasing decision.
Given the variety of assisted two wheeled vehicles available and the ease with which they can be hacked to over perform, I think local regulation would be better aimed at rider choices than the technology. In particular, speed limits and passing clearance seem to be the issues.
Our bike infrastructure is so tenuous that a single route has to serve all users in some places. Posting speed limits would give some backing for social pressure to be more civil on MUPs. In the worst case this would enable legal or civil penalties for people who disregard the safety of others and cause injury.
I’m not against athletic training on bikes. Bike racing brings out the human potential for power, speed, and grace. However when riding speeds (assisted or not) create a hazard they should be limited on MUPs.
As in skiing or any civil road use, the party being overtaken has right of way and the burden of safe passage is on the person who wants to pass. The standard of care is much greater for passing pedestrians because of the speed differential and the greater vulnerability of pedestrians, pedestrians having no metal bits at all to take the shock of a crash.
Am I the only one who thinks that the writer kind of misses the point? It doesn’t matter much what you call it, because there are so many permutations, legal and illegal, to these rigs. And, talking about victim blaming. I’m getting pretty tired of this kind of grammatical pickiness. We all know what the police mean, and what 99% of the public well understands: people riding irresponsibly on vehicles powered by electric batteries and suffering nasty consequences due to their actions. Let’s focus on that, rather than just words. and, please don’t tell me that ‘words matter’. I know that.
That’s an ebike for sure. Calling a motor a 250W or a 2000W etc. doesn’t mean anything it’s just the firmware / motor controller etc. that limit the power that is SENT to the motor, it’s not the motor that sets the power. 2000W might simply mean that the motor will last more than 5 minutes with 2000W of power through it.
FYI I’d say 50%+ of the ebikes can go over 35 mph. I got one of these, it’s just some setting to change what the cut-off speed is which makes sense because if I want to ride it around my own property I want a max mode etc.
https://www.juicedbikes.com/products/crosscurrent-x-step-through?variant=39461567365184